rb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: The problem, and the reason for the existence of this bug, is that I cannot build a shared object that links to libpython2.5.so.1 and works.
Please don't mark this bug invalid until this problem is fixed. My proposal of adding dependencies to lib-dynload/*.so is just a suggestion on how to go about fixing this bug. If this is not a suitable solution, please suggest a solution that is. In response to your discussion on why the static library is currently useful, you haven't really answered the question. In what circumstance would someone actually want to build against the static library and then dynamically load other libraries? "Because it works" isn't an answer, as if this bug were fixed, then building against the shared library would validly have the same response. Why static over dynamic, if when static you have to link to dynamic anyway? _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue4434> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
