From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-88513-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7ABEB138334
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:58:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 62C6AE0CB6;
	Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:58:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9BB6E0CA8
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:58:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-98-218-46-55.hsd1.md.comcast.net [98.218.46.55])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: mjo)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9763C34B0E4
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 21:58:10 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 3/3] dev-vcs/hub: migrate to go-module.eclass
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
References: <20190911172128.18885-1-williamh@gentoo.org>
 <20190911172128.18885-4-williamh@gentoo.org>
 <f7b0d6ce-4bad-0daf-4e62-ac941f573bf4@gentoo.org>
 <CAAr7Pr8_VhHsPvNvwUMVh-jX7z+7uOQBPNjx_FbBocRzh9brcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190911234815.GA21591@whubbs1.dev.av1.gaikai.org>
 <CAAr7Pr-WK2VcB+CJAY8HXTK7kyXqf4KnCb+DSe+CwsmoEAbFjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20190912154634.GB23846@whubbs1.dev.av1.gaikai.org>
 <88094567-323c-6f6a-a1d9-0c1b77ef53e3@gentoo.org>
 <CAAr7Pr8v_fr_yS9y6Y19X5FJqqDT0mc09jAJ8szx0WNXOiC-KQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <6acd490e-6393-62e4-5d07-71c2a3624417@gentoo.org>
 <CAAr7Pr_rhCAr1daJdG8rxggRk1W_C-6+B+gjRFb6iyr69YGOtA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michael Orlitzky <mjo@gentoo.org>
Message-ID: <98f7c838-6562-1214-c883-ec4cdbd45d4e@gentoo.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 17:58:08 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAr7Pr_rhCAr1daJdG8rxggRk1W_C-6+B+gjRFb6iyr69YGOtA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: d359f070-d28c-4991-9b35-5cb6175f9e69
X-Archives-Hash: 68219ab83d1115132ac3af733c815246

On 9/12/19 1:45 PM, Alec Warner wrote:
> 
> Er, I'm fairly sure computer *science* has not conclusively proven that
> dynamic binaries are somehow superior to static binaries.
> 

What are the benefits of static linking to the end user on Gentoo? The
comprehensive list is usually,

  * The application works independent of what libraries are installed
    on the system.

That however reduces to the empty list on Gentoo, because we have
dependency management (the right libraries are guaranteed be installed)
and subslot/revdep-rebuilds (the application gets rebuilt when they
change). The disadvantages, of course, remain:

  * They increase compile times.
  * They break LICENSE handling.
  * They break security updates.
  * They break all other (bug/feature) updates in dependencies, too.
  * They use more space on disk.
  * They use more memory at runtime.

What kind of math would convince you that an idea with all "cons" and no
"pros" is bad?