coapp-developers team mailing list archive

["William A. Rowe Jr." <wmrowe@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/1/2010 7:46 AM, Olaf van der Spek 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.

If I were building the zip/zlib packages, I wouldn't have an issue with the
zip and unzip utilities depending on zlib.dll, that is as it should be.

I would have an issue if we couldn't compile the standalone unzipsfx stub
binary without linking to zlib.lib.  That is an example where dlls vs libs
becomes significant.