I don't know about you, but I always static link when possible because I am so tired of the DLL (SO) hell. Quick real-life example: I had a program that heavil

I don't know about you, but I always static link when possible because I am so tired of the DLL (SO) hell. Quick real-life example: I had a program that heavily relied upon curl library and fork(), compiled (dynamically linked) and ran in debian 8 would work flawlessly, when ran over debian 9 would have a lot of memory leaks and sometimes SEGVs, when statically linked the program would ran the same way (good) in debian 8 and 9. It took me days to track down and find out that unlike in debian 8 in debian 9 the curl library uses a threaded dns resolver which of course is not a very smart thing to fork() after, so the new curl library had a new feature that messed up the program logic completely. So, no, I would say static linking is way better than dynamic because is CONSISTENT, the library functions you call are guaranteed to behave the way you think they will. Also the ltrace, LD_PRELOAD, etc doesn't legitimize the use of shared libs, why would you debug a release binary?