From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Bug reports for GNU Guix Subject: bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2019 16:42:15 +0100 Message-ID: <87a782bz90.fsf@nckx> References: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> Reply-To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:34173) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi9-0003pO-Fg for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi8-0002s2-Fy for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:05 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:46111) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi7-0002m3-C8 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1idyi7-0007y1-Az for bug-guix@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Dec 2019 10:43:03 -0500 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: In-reply-to: <87fthwdr0p.fsf@posteo.net> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" Cc: 38500@debbugs.gnu.org, Brett Gilio , Vicente Eduardo --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Vincente, Brett, Brett Gilio =E5=86=99=E9=81=93=EF=BC=9A > Vicente Eduardo writes: > >> I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one,=20 >> that's the common way >> Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style. Important: static linking isn't the Guixy style at all! Statically linking different packages =E2=80=98subverts=E2=80=99 Guix, can = subvert=20 grafting and lead to undetected security holes. > Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. Correct. > _BUT_, I could be > missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the=20 > higher > powers that be to respond. You could ask Pjotr Prins and David Thompson but I suspect that it=20 was simply an oversight: most packages link dynamically by default=20 because it's the sane thing to do, and it would have been=20 reasonable to assume Ruby did too. If there is a good reason to link statically, it should be added=20 in a comment. Kind regards, T G-R --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEfo+u0AlEeO9y5k0W2Imw8BjFSTwFAl3tGdcACgkQ2Imw8BjF STxP7g//Q2Q6IS6BCmEmdunGRZIbDquuU+btDA44/p+vhbBocOyDnI8cPwsVBsqt 1I70TsklZU1Wt7qhPn+RbGaLIMnVDc1phUgqO9pGY8pI6KeaFoUneYQjq6fgn2W0 S0COWrg2nCZCf7ReoJ6uhhcV+ma+23wOrJL1LgaCoSG+LtRyzn73dHsqVx/HQaKA IZIX32QGhDF6siwcdytWtcWkeCC98wS2oZlCsn0hnQkwV+PY5eBig/MYqAvgUvaL Nc7tEFdbGLUj7rfLrjFYTF7tJhbyC1MzPrnQ6+is1i5hrtdND2GW1R4KhmTsCuKV c9WKvqPwxeotVg3BDGoOpNLOa+ZdgE535A9I8iZSqBllTek5ZYPcqdlp5bO8gUiq n0d2pY+7mv8r46D01genvbCf4AFzj9/OYnQJK+5FTbidYClaG4iYQZlHvbc4zzlz cap54+yP1ATlYkd5UvBcH4nd5KwVsDoA9NXspSmraFoccctc0cG4JHf7IfDH/IRu pjqVaCIdnaJR42Jupwld9+0H2qCr0X1tvb0Av5WlRHWHCfg9NGDf631izEsEcIue 769dNd4+vK5Tll1mQyCoO6UkBopTFP9ug7jFygSkFZWgAjjzPwRRbGs/uTDq4bTW 21DF3SLrmeIBnJBUJrknT5k+CyddW7nO7tOrZbWpEUBYHfLqrig= =QDEB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--