On Mon, 21 Feb 2005, Michael Koch wrote:
I really wonder why you want static libraries instead of dynamic ones. What is the need for this ? GCJ doesnt need them. It has its own shared library and some free VMs (jamvm, sablevm, kissme, cacao, etc.) use the share JNI libraries provided by classpath itself.
Why do you ever want to build shared binaries? Smaller executable, or you need it self-contained, or you're running on a single-purpose embedded system, or you are doing tricky debugging, or you want to perform aggressive linker optimization, or you want faster startup.
The point is, Java is "just a language" just like C is. If a static version of the C standard library is useful (and included in Debian), then a static version of the Java standard library is useful (and should be in Debian).
As it turns out, my static java compiler (FLEX) does static linker optimizations which require static binaries -- ld isn't quite smart enough to put all the pieces together dynamically. Static java libraries would be useful.
--scott
Chechnya assassination ZRBRIEF Cheney GRALLSPICE Japan affinity group Hawk FSF Ft. Meade LCPANES MI5 Mk 48 Suharto MKDELTA SSBN 731 Leitrim
( http://cscott.net/ )
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
