Slackware updating gtk modules
although shared libraries are bigger security risksi made an acc just to reply to this. In aggregate, static linking the same dependency for multiple programs will increase memory usage as well despite your assertions to the contrary since the pages will not generally be shared (yes, I'm aware some OS have page dedup or compression, etc., but I'm talking about the general case here)things to upgrade, yes more bandwidth, yes (not much if one uses binary diffs)A binary diff of 100 programs all linking to the same library will still be larger than the diffs for a single library. I understand static linking quite well, since my day job is part of a commercial OS team that coincidentally pioneered dynamic linking technology in UNIX. some functions use other functions (fopen()-In aggregate, static linking the same dependency for multiple programs will increase memory usage as well despite your assertions to the contrary since the pages will not generally be shared (yes, I'm aware some OS have page dedup or compression, etc., but I'm talking about the general case here)pages, functions (and/or variable objects).In addition, updating 100 binaries, even with diffs still takes longer than uprating a single library, which means increased downtime during system updates.potentially increased security risks, yes. So let's not base our arguments on assumptions about knowledge just because we disagree. when you make a on unices you are making a ar(1) archive out of .o object files.So to me, the right answer is to fix the root of the problem, not paper over it by pretending there isn't one by essentially embedding copies of every dependency into an application.In short, start encouraging developers to reduce their dependency chains, properly release manage their software, ensure that core system components offer stable interfaces, and provide timely updates.Maybe distros like Debian are more stability/security oriented than feature oriented.New version of software often contain new features that it may introduce new bugs.although shared libraries are bigger security risks Code is code; how is shared linking a greater risk? Most OS linkers already do efficient loading of only the relevant portions of a shared library since they typically mmap the library file.a page is 4k B (on x86 at least). when the linker is linking the final binary it opens that archive and pulls out the relevant .o objectsso "statically linking to properly(!
But in the situation that a new version of the software is released, and I think it would benefit me right now, I'd trade all those downsides for being able to use that software right now than waiting to be included in my distro (like it happened to me with Gimp some years ago).
Stack Exchange network consists of 175 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
Visit Stack Exchange This problem may occur on a 64-bit machine when one installs 32-bit software that requires canberra-gtk-module. In this case, the solution is to install the 32-bit version: Thank you for your interest in this question.
I'm plenty of memory, storage and bandwidth but not so much of time to compile it by hand.
I have to admit that this is just a workaround while we find a better software release and dependency management system.