[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: GPL traitor !

From: Andrew Halliwell
Subject: Re: GPL traitor !
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:59:44 +0100
User-agent: tin/1.9.2-20070201 ("Dalaruan") (UNIX) (Linux/2.6.24-24-generic (i686))

David Kastrup <> wrote:
> Hyman Rosen <> writes:
>> David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Dynamic linking delays the act of copying, but it remains an
>>> essential integral part of putting the program to its intended
>>> use.
>> The difference between static and dynamic linking is that in
>> static linking the copying occurs as part of making and
>> distributing the program, and in dynamic linking the copying
>> occurs, if it does, as part of running the program. This is not
>> an irrelevant detail; it's an essential difference.
> It isn't.  The essential copy is the copy in the computer main memory,
> and that is the same whether you link dynamically or statically.

Wrong. If you link statically, the copy exists within the code itself.
Any disc, printout, CD, flash memory stick that contains the program ALSO
contains the statically compiled portions of the library.

With dynamic linking the library exists seperately on the computer and is
only loaded into memory when it is required on execution of the program.
> Whether you deliver a script which does the static linking, or whether
> you call the dynamic linker makes no difference.

It does, y'know.
|   | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste!         |
|   Andrew Halliwell BSc   |  I can SMELL!!!  KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and    |
|            in            |  get out the puncture repair kit!"              |
|     Computer Science     |     Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf              |

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]