Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple APILearn More
Some linux software, often proprietary, that is distributed as tar.gz claims it's statically linked, self-containment, distro independent and what not.
More often then not, that's completely false.
Most of the time, they are, at least, dynamically linked against Glibc, so fuck everyone who uses a musl based system.
They are usually developed to appear statically linked on Ubuntu, because that's the only distro that comes prebloated with all actually required libraries.
IntrusionCM5896228d@SortOfTested That's the thing that confuses me... But now I know that we mean the same thing.
My nitpicky brain goes wrrooom.
Statically build usually means it has no shared libraries and no runtime libraries.
Statically linked means that the libraries do not contain shared objects - but a plugin system might load during runtime additional stuff.
Self contained is either fully static (as in no shared code and no runtime dependency) or (eg SNAP / Flatpak / ...) all dynamic libraries are provided and executable in a "containerized" way.
And yes. The author is right.
This is mostly done in the wrong way with annoying consequences...
As a packager you reaaaally hate it when some builds have runtime dependencies which are not visible in the build system AT ALL.
(If I made mistakes I'm sorry - brain is flatlining and beer is flowing)