3 ms·

If dynamic libraries are compatible to what they did (when you developed the program) then why waste disk and RAM?

by kreetx 3y ago

aidenn0 3y ago
Because disk and RAM are cheap and that's a huge "If"
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jonhohle 3y ago
  There’s also other security considerations. As an operator or builder, do you want to patch a library (say OpenSSL) to keep your system up to date or patch every binary. If changing a dependency requires rebuilding all consumers recursively, the there’s not a huge benefit.
  - aidenn0 3y ago
    I think in the specific case of security issues, more bugs have been fixed by upgrading dynamic dependencies than introduced. That's just my gut feeling though, and I'd like to see data.
    - rewmie 3y ago
      > I think in the specific case of security issues, more bugs have been fixed by upgrading dynamic dependencies than introduced. That's just your personal assertion, which is entirely baseless and unsubstantiated. It's ok to have beliefs, but instead of pushing them as truths you should at least start by doing some cursory research to see if they are even plausible. And yours isn't.
      - klysm 3y ago
        He qualified it saying it was a hunch… I don’t see where he pushed it as a truth
      - aidenn0 3y ago
        It's not entirely unsubstantiated, as my experience is that the former is very common. The latter is much harder to observe though, so it's just an impression. I'm very interested in your assertion that my impression is implausible though. What evidence do you have?
- selfhoster11 3y ago
  Only cheap if you're running on huge servers. End user machines and edge compute are more constrained, so one needs to be more polite with resource use there.
- kreetx 3y ago
  It seems to me that deploying a static binary is for situations where one doesn't have control over the underlying system, or where shipping dependencies hasn't been solved, i.e, you just want to ship one binary.
  - klysm 3y ago
    Shipping one binary is much easier and I don’t even want to solve the problem of shipping deps as separate artifacts

If dynamic libraries are compatible to what they did (when you developed the program) then why waste disk and RAM?

by kreetx 3y ago

If dynamic libraries are compatible to what they did (when you developed the program) then why waste disk and RAM?

aidenn0 3y ago

Because disk and RAM are cheap and that's a huge "If"

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jonhohle 3y ago
There’s also other security considerations. As an operator or builder, do you want to patch a library (say OpenSSL) to keep your system up to date or patch every binary. If changing a dependency requires rebuilding all consumers recursively, the there’s not a huge benefit.
- aidenn0 3y ago
  I think in the specific case of security issues, more bugs have been fixed by upgrading dynamic dependencies than introduced. That's just my gut feeling though, and I'd like to see data.
  - rewmie 3y ago
    > I think in the specific case of security issues, more bugs have been fixed by upgrading dynamic dependencies than introduced. That's just your personal assertion, which is entirely baseless and unsubstantiated. It's ok to have beliefs, but instead of pushing them as truths you should at least start by doing some cursory research to see if they are even plausible. And yours isn't.
    - klysm 3y ago
      He qualified it saying it was a hunch… I don’t see where he pushed it as a truth
    - aidenn0 3y ago
      It's not entirely unsubstantiated, as my experience is that the former is very common. The latter is much harder to observe though, so it's just an impression. I'm very interested in your assertion that my impression is implausible though. What evidence do you have?
selfhoster11 3y ago
Only cheap if you're running on huge servers. End user machines and edge compute are more constrained, so one needs to be more polite with resource use there.
kreetx 3y ago
It seems to me that deploying a static binary is for situations where one doesn't have control over the underlying system, or where shipping dependencies hasn't been solved, i.e, you just want to ship one binary.
- klysm 3y ago
  Shipping one binary is much easier and I don’t even want to solve the problem of shipping deps as separate artifacts