Re: Static Build

On Wednesday 11 June 2003 19:00, Adam Pendleton wrote:
> I keep hearing that a static version of pgAdmin3 is desired, so I
> thought that I would just squash the thought before it gets to far. It
> would be next to impossible to release a static version of pgAdmin3
> because of the large number of dependencies of the program. Keep in
> mind, that just because we link against a static version of the
> wxWindows library, doesn't mean that we aren't using shared symbols. We
> would also need static versions of glibc, PostgreSQL, and any libraries
> against which any of those programs link. We would need to be able to
> pull in static code for *every* library that our program touches, or any
> library that a library our program touches touches. I think statically
> linking against wxWindows is a good idea, since it is not likely to be
> available on client machines, but to statically link against something
> like the GNU C Library is just an unnecessary headache, since it's not
> unreasonable to require a client to have that library installed (every
> other program on the machine requires it too!). Just my 2 cents.

Hi everyone,

This is why we need strong dependency checking during RPM install or whatever
other packaging system used.

By the way, the Suse 82 problem certainly relies to a dependency question.
Here is an extract of the spec file. Could you "tell" what package is missing
in order to build wxWindows 2.5 cvs? 0.01 cent question.

Requires: gtk2 >= 2.2, glibc >= 2.3.2, libjpeg >= 6, libpng >= 1.2.2, pango >=
1.2.1, libstdc++ >= 3.2.2, openssl >= 0.9.6, libtiff >= 3.5.7, zlib >= 1.1.4

BuildRequires: autoconf >= 2.57, automake >= 1.7.2, gtk2-devel >= 2.2,
postgresql >= 7.3.2, openssl-devel >= 0.9.6, pkgconfig >= 0.14, libpng-devel
>= 1.2.2, gtk2-engines >= 2.2, gcc-c++ >= 7.3

Cheers, Jean-Michel