In our previous episode, Graeme Geldenhuys said: > In fpGUI based applications I have always used static link to libraries > like Xlib or Xft, using the units xlib.pas and xft.pas > > I want to add spellchecker support (from a C library) to one of my > applications. So what is better, to continue using static linking, or > rather use dynamic linking (via dynlibs unit)?
> What would be the pros and cons of each? Static dynamic: (dyn lib statically linked) - lib<x>.so must be available at compiletime - searches ldconfig/ld_library_path at runtime for that name. Dynamic: (dyn lib dlopen'ed) - Can look for multiple names, but must guess if they are compatible. - Must guess paths to search. (afaik all current implementations in headers don't read out ldconfig, and for certain not platform independant) The latter is very noticable under FreeBSD where /usr/local/lib and in the past /usr/x11r6/lib weren't searched (while it usually worked fine when statically dynamically compiled on FreeBSD). > Only thing with dynamic linking that I can see, is than 'ldd <myapp>' > doesn't list the spellchecker library. I also believe, using dynamic > linking under linux binds you to the linux C library. Using nearly any C lib will bind you to the C library. _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
