Quote:
Originally Posted by twobob
And why not "Prefer Static Libraries" ??
Code:
networking/lib.a(inetd.o): In function `reread_config_file':
inetd.c:(.text.reread_config_file+0x988): warning: Using 'getservbyname' in statically linked applications requires at runtime the shared libraries from the glibc version used for linking
networking/lib.a(netstat.o): In function `ip_port_str':
netstat.c:(.text.ip_port_str+0x48): warning: Using 'getservbyport' in statically linked applications requires at runtime the shared libraries from the glibc version used for linking
networking/lib.a(inetd.o): In function `reread_config_file':
inetd.c:(.text.reread_config_file+0x8e8): warning: Using 'getrpcbyname' in statically linked applications requires at runtime the shared libraries from the glibc version used for linking
lol... that's why not... turning it off now then  |
Yeah, in general the glibc people *hate* static linking. There are no ABI guarantees between glibc releases for .o files and only limited guarantees for .a files: it produces huge binaries (not what you want on a Kindle), and, well, the problem you're seeing is because name resolution depends on dynamic linking anyway, to invoke the NSS libraries! So even a statically linked glibc program has to link in what amounts to a static version of /lib/ld-linux.so.2 anyway. (It's not quite the same as the normal dynamic loader -- it doesn't support dlmopen() for instance -- but it is built from the same source code and is mostly the same. Except that it takes up space in every binary.)
Static linking is for your /bin/busybox and /sbin/sln only (and the latter only because you need it to recover a b0rked glibc installation). Just forget about it for everything else, and you'll be happier.