bug#38500: Ruby is built against libruby-static.a

[Brett Gilio <brettg@posteo.net>]

Vicente Eduardo <vic798@gmail.com> writes:

> I would like to have two versions, or at least the dynamic one, that's the common way
> Ruby should be built, and also the Guixy style.

This actually brings up a rather interesting point. What is the Guix
protocol on compilation for dynamic vs statically linked interpreters?
This is a prevalent issue not just for Ruby, but for also how we handle
GHC, Rust, JDK, and so on.

Generally, I think we dynamically link most objects. _BUT_, I could be
missing part of the story here. So I am going to wait for the higher
powers that be to respond.

In the mean time, when I get a moment, I will do some auditing on this
package to see if the issue is just that we are missing some compilation
procedure. Hopefully it is just as simple as that, but I still think the
issue of linkage style (dynamic vs static linkage) remains prevalent.

Hopefully we hear some noise on this soon.

-- 
Brett M. Gilio
https://git.sr.ht/~brettgilio/