On 12.12.2017 16:02, Gordonjcp wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 09:26:55PM +0100, Markus Seeber wrote:
>>>> and be done with it, let offensive software die. In my eyes writing a plugin GUI
>>>> in GTK/Qt is very bad practice for exactly these reasons.
>>> So what would you write it in instead?
>>>
>> You can still statically link for example with FLTK and derivatives or roll your
> That doesn't answer the question, really. For one thing, statically
> linking *anything* is utterly ridiculous and anyone doing that now or
> indeed at any point in the past 30 years of Unix development should have
> their hands cut off.
I guess I need to cut my hands then. And a bunch of other developers
will too.
Static linking is sometimes the only choice if you want to ensure the
plugin binaries that yourself distribute will work for everyone.
Try using a new fftw3 and then use the binary on a slightly older
system, and you'll see missing symbols.
We had this kind of discussion several times already...
Either we use self-contained plugins, or stop using (shared library
based) plugins altogether.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Tue Dec 12 20:15:01 2017
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Dec 12 2017 - 20:15:02 EET