On Sun, 10 Dec 2017, Markus Seeber wrote:
Bottom line: It turned out the Windows way of shipping all or most
libs with the program is a really good way to compatibility.
Just employ static linking when sensible. There are less ways a linker can
screw that up
Often policy gets in the way of sensible. Some examples:
- it would be sensible for debian packagers to include the "includes" with
both the jackd1 and jackd2 packages rather than separating out
to a *-dev package or at least name the jackd1 *-dev package so it
can not be confused for use with jackd2.
- it would be sensible if all plugins were packaged staticly linked but
policy says otherwise.
Audio production on Linux or for that matter on any OS, is a tiny portion
of the total users which these policies are made for. Some distros may
allow for exceptions to policy, but packaging already takes more effort
than creating the software in the first place (at least the small
utilities I have made so far), fighting some policy is just not worth it.
I think this is one place where it is easier for the developer to supply a
staticly linked set of files with a script to install them. The user can
download them there rather than expecting their distro to "get it right".
--
Len Ovens
www.ovenwerks.net
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
