Compiler: Size of generated executable file

[retard]

Tue, 12 Jan 2010 22:00:25 -0500, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:13:36PM -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>> If you use dynamic linking, the user just need to keep its system
>> updated to avoid this kind of issues, and you only need to care about
>> new release when the bugs are really from your program, not third-party
>> libraries.
> 
> Yes, that is a benefit of dynamic linking. But, the other side of this
> is if the third-party library's new version breaks your app, your poor
> user is in trouble.
> 
> The choice to go dynamic is a trade off - sometimes worth it, but I tend
> to assume not until the specific case shows otherwise.

It's not only useful when security issues arise. The 3rd party libraries 
can be bug fixed as much as their author wants to without touching end 
user applications. Imagine something universal like Gtk+ or Qt. 
Unfortunately Linux is full of badly maintained api breaking libraries. 
Just a while ago I couldn't print at all because cups or some other 
library depended on an internal symbol of another lib.