Re: fltk linkage

Jorge wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 06:07:54PM +0000, corvid wrote:
> > 
> > In September 2011, I wrote:
> > > Do we still have a reason for telling people to stick with
> > > static linkage when building fltk?
> > 
> > I was thinking about what our installation instructions should look like
> > these days, and how everyone has a decent chance of having a fltk-1.3
> > package available and it may not be best to tell them to run off and
> > compile fltk unless fltk-config --version doesn't tell them any good news
> > and they can't get a pkg...   and this led me to wonder about the
> > necessity/appropriateness of static linking.
> > 
> > All that I found in the archive was me wondering about it last year and
> > no one replying to me. Well, except this now. I'm replying to me, if that
> > counts.
> 
>   FWIW, I build in a Debian system now and:
> 
>   $ ldd dillo
>   [...]
>   libpng12.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpng12.so.0 (0x00007f2c3e312000)
>   libfltk.so.1.3 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libfltk.so.1.3 (0x00007f2c3dfd0000)
>   [...]
> 
>   I thought this meant it was linked with a shared version of FLTK.
>   What am I missing?

*digs through fltk for a minute*

So it's a matter of whether fltk is configured with --enable-shared, then?

The main page of the website still says "statically-linked by default!",
and all along I've had the impression that it had to do with the form of
how we link in the Makefile.

I guess it makes sense to rm that mention from the website, then.

I could've sworn that it was in our documentation somewhere, too, but I
don't see it anywhere at the moment.

PS I think we will be able to get rid of the warning about --enable-cairo ,
since it doesn't seem to do anything bad with fltk-1.3.