> Well, the thing is: we need to patch a fair number of applications > then (Xorg, gdb, ...) since the dependency used to be brought in > automatically (even explicitly, in the case of libc.a), so it looked > like it was a libc-provided feature.
Well, it was. I'm just rethinking the decision made all those years ago. It should certainly be made consistent between static and dynamic linking, and the situation today is that even static linking makes the RPC libraries an implicit part of the libc API.
