3 ms·
Instead of Docker, static linking is a much more elegant solution if library/dep management is painful. Switching to static linking using a sane libc (not glib
by fullspectrumdev 2y ago
Instead of Docker, static linking is a much more elegant solution if library/dep management is painful.
Switching to static linking using a sane libc (not glibc) can be a pain initially but you end up with way less overhead IMO.
- munchler 2y agoStatic linking is a good way to avoid the problem, but I’d hardly call it “elegant” to replicate the same runtime library in every executable. It’s very wasteful - we’re just fortunate to have enough storage these days to get away with it.
- forrestthewoods 2y ago> I’d hardly call it “elegant” to replicate the same runtime library in every executable. It’s very wasteful - we’re just fortunate to have enough storage these days to get away with it. I think you need to quantify "very wasteful". Quite frankly it's actually just fine. Totally fine. Especially when the alternative has turned out to be massive Docker images! So the alternative isn't actually any better. Womp womp. An actually elegant solution would be a copy-on-write filesystem that can deduplicate. It'd be the best of both worlds.
- jcelerier 2y ago> Switching to static linking using a sane libc (not glibc) can be a pain initially but you end up with way less overhead IMO. how does that work when you app needs access to the gpu drivers ?