static libraries

Alexey Pushkin alexey.pushkin at
Fri Feb 20 16:04:23 UTC 2009

Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 06:13:28PM +0300, Alexey Pushkin wrote:
> [...]
> The general Fedora policy is to package up dynamic libraries in
> preference to static libraries, and this is the policy we have
> pursued.  You'll have to take up any issues with Fedora (good luck!)

Windows is different from Linux and IMHO the reasoning
behind this policy is not applicable to Mingw stuff.

> We also have the nsiswrapper tool which makes packaging DLLs for
> distribution particularly easy, because by default nsiswrapper will
> find and package any dependent DLLs that you need.

If you distribute a .dll (as opposed to executables)
all the installer wisdom doesn't help much.

Users just want to have your .dll with no dependencies,
no matter what. And even if they accept dependencies,
they'll start making incredible amount of mistakes.

> This, however, seems to be a bug:
>> And it's simply strange to have huge libstdc++.a
>> statically linked into an executable and at the same time
>> depend on tiny little libz1.dll

I'm afraid you're going to make libstdc++ and libgcc dynamic :-(

If you don't keep an option to have them static I'll not be
able to use Fedora packages anymore :-(

> Rich.

More information about the mingw mailing list