Re: Question about dynamic and static libraries
Re: Question about dynamic and static libraries
- Subject: Re: Question about dynamic and static libraries
- From: Eric Albert <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:46:05 -0800
On Dec 28, 2005, at 5:38 PM, Brant Sears wrote:
That said, when I view my app executable using "otool -L" and it doesn't show the .dylib because I did link only to the .a and deleted the .dylib from my computer before building my app, I am amazed when the linker is going off and loading the .dylib at some later time on a different computer. The whole purpose of using the static library was to *prevent* this kind of scenario. I'm imaginging this to be a potential security risk and a potential source of failure in the field that I would like to prevent without losing the benefits of a traiditonal static library.
I hate to say this, but this can't really be the case. The OS doesn't work that way. Either you're linking against the library or dynamically loading it at runtime, or it won't get loaded.
Deprecated usually means we can still use something but that it is going away in the future. I'm very surprised to hear that something as useful as static libraries are going away. It is like oatmeal being deprecated or something.
As I mentioned in a reply to Bill's post, static libraries are neither deprecated nor going away. Neither, as far as I know, is the current implementation of oatmeal, since dynamic oatmeal doesn't appear to be something our customers want.
-Eric
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden