coapp-developers team mailing list archive

[Trevor Dennis <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Philip Allison
> <mangobrain@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > There is a use case for creating a minimal, stand-alone version of a
> > particular package, bundling just what it needs into a deployable
> > image, but I can't remember what conclusions have been reached about
> > that.
>
> Sometimes a single exe is desirable. In that cases, static linking is
> the only option.
>
>
One of the main goals of the CoApp project though is to reduce code
duplication.

For example, we want to get down to only one copy of ZLIB.DLL on a computer
with all applications using that single copy.  If projects start statically
linking those libraries in, we lose the main benefit of CoApp.

Those statically linked projects also miss out on updated versions of shared
libraries.  Security and bug fixes that are deployed will not be used by
these applications and will leave computers vulnerable to exploit.


Trevor