Hi Walter!

If you are going to continue to deliver Linux executables for 'dmd' without the ability for users to compile it themselves (which is fine with me... I have no problem with that), I highly recommend that you provide them as completely statically linked executables so that users can run them on any Linux system without problems.

I write and deliver EDA tools that literally run on thousands of different Linux and HPUX boxes, and I have learned over the years that in order to keep my tools running, I need to make sure that they are statically linked.

Yes, it does increase the executable size (slightly... really not much at all, believe it or not), but the small size difference is certainly worth the benefit.

My typical object compile lines look like this:
g++ -O -DLINUX -ansi -static -c -o help.o help.cpp

and my typical link lines look like this:
g++ -O -DLINUX -ansi -static -o myprog main.o help.o -lGL -lX11 -lXext -lm

Finally, I 'strip' it.  The result looks like this:

% file myprog
myprog: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux
2.2.5, statically linked, stripped

% file myprog  (on a different system)
myprog: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, IA-64, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.4.0,
statically linked, stripped

% ldd myprog
not a dynamic executable

If you could do this, I would very much appreciate it.
I *really* want to use D/Ruby/OpenGL for my next large-scale EDA tool, and
hopefully convince my entire department to switch over to D (and Ruby)... but if
we can't run 'dmd', it won't happen.

Thanks so much!!!
-- Glenn Lewis

Glenn M. Lewis wrote:
> If you could do this, I would very much appreciate it.
> I *really* want to use D/Ruby/OpenGL for my next large-scale EDA tool, and
> hopefully convince my entire department to switch over to D (and Ruby)... but if
> we can't run 'dmd', it won't happen.
I second this, except static linking will not really help my 64bit problem. And except that I am not going to large-scale'ly use DMD.

I know it'skind of off topic, but you guys seem fluent in this:
hey--I ship a game that needs openGL (vegastrike.sf.net)...sure it's openSource but most of my users don't know how to compile...when I ship a binary it needs this or that glibc and is a mess (per distro sort of mess)
static not only destroys my linkage to the openGL driver of the week but also it segfaults upon launch...
any suggestions how to overcome this without requiring a version for each distro, and without statically linking in OpenGL?



Glenn M. Lewis wrote:
> Hi Walter!
> 
> If you are going to continue to deliver Linux executables for 'dmd' without the
> ability for users to compile it themselves (which is fine with me... I have no
> problem with that), I highly recommend that you provide them as completely
> statically linked executables so that users can run them on any Linux system
> without problems.
> 
> I write and deliver EDA tools that literally run on thousands of different Linux
> and HPUX boxes, and I have learned over the years that in order to keep my tools
> running, I need to make sure that they are statically linked.
> 
> Yes, it does increase the executable size (slightly... really not much at all,
> believe it or not), but the small size difference is certainly worth the
> benefit.
> 
> My typical object compile lines look like this:
> g++ -O -DLINUX -ansi -static -c -o help.o help.cpp
> 
> and my typical link lines look like this:
> g++ -O -DLINUX -ansi -static -o myprog main.o help.o -lGL -lX11 -lXext -lm
> 
> Finally, I 'strip' it.  The result looks like this:
> 
> % file myprog
> myprog: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux
> 2.2.5, statically linked, stripped
> 
> % file myprog  (on a different system)
> myprog: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, IA-64, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.4.0,
> statically linked, stripped
> 
> % ldd myprog
> not a dynamic executable
> 
> If you could do this, I would very much appreciate it.
> I *really* want to use D/Ruby/OpenGL for my next large-scale EDA tool, and
> hopefully convince my entire department to switch over to D (and Ruby)... but if
> we can't run 'dmd', it won't happen.
> 
> Thanks so much!!!
> -- Glenn Lewis
> 
> 

Daniel Horn wrote:
> I know it'skind of off topic, but you guys seem fluent in this:
> hey--I ship a game that needs openGL (vegastrike.sf.net)...sure it's openSource but most of my users don't know how to compile...when I ship a binary it needs this or that glibc and is a mess (per distro sort of mess)
> static not only destroys my linkage to the openGL driver of the week but also it segfaults upon launch...
> any suggestions how to overcome this without requiring a version for each distro, and without statically linking in OpenGL?

Would the Linux Standard Base help? http://refspecs.freestandards.org/lsb.shtml
OpenGL is in there too. I don't know how many distributions actually comply though.

Bastiaan.