Thursday, May 5, 2005, 1:16:05 PM, you wrote:
RH> On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 04:57:48PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> The savings of creating static libraries would be small if we
>> refrained from building non-PIC object files.
RH> But still largely useless. Who in their right mind is going to
Friday, May 6, 2005, 1:33:32 AM, you wrote:
AH> Rutger Ovidius writes:
>> Thursday, May 5, 2005, 1:16:05 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> RH> On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 04:57:48PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> >> The savings of creating static libraries would
Friday, May 6, 2005, 8:06:49 AM, you wrote:
AH> Rutger Ovidius writes:
>> Friday, May 6, 2005, 1:33:32 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> AH> I don't think that anyone is proposing to drop static libraries on
>> AH> Win32. Win32 systems have their own requirements th
Friday, May 6, 2005, 9:14:31 AM, you wrote:
AH> Rutger Ovidius writes:
>> Friday, May 6, 2005, 8:06:49 AM, you wrote:
>>
>> AH> But Java isn't compatible with static linking. Java is, by its very
>> AH> nature, a dynamic language, where classes invoke a
