Re: Not Much LINUX Stuff of Late

Charlie Gibbs <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 2026-07-28, c186282 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>    Actually, that it's SO difficult to install said
>>    stupid little utilities these days - doesn't give
>>    me a good feeling for the future.
>
>I'm still a fan of static-linked binaries.  No DLL hell,
>no installer that has to know where to scatter a myriad
>of files, no breakages when a library gets updated.

You are obviously talking about Windows here. The Linux world has
passed that time two decades ago. We have libraries with versioned
symbols, we have versioned package dependencies

>Just run the one file from anywhere and it Just Works.  

... that just works.

If you have difficulties with that, I'd suggest trying Debian, the
Debian project does a pretty decent job with their library
dependencies.

Statically linked binaries, especially those who came "from anywhere"
usually don't get updated, which imposes a significant security risk
to the target system. I'd avoid doing that anyway or at least
container those binaries away.

Greetings
Marc
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         |   " Questions are the         | Mailadresse im Header
Rhein-Neckar, DE   |     Beginning of Wisdom "     | 
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 6224 1600402