Re: [GnomeMeeting-list] Re: Why all the #%$ *(*& dependencies Was: GnomeMeeting-list Digest, Vol 20, Issue 35

[Allan <amau sympatico ca>]

On Monday 19 December 2005 13:09, Jouni Lohikoski iki fi wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2005 at 11:55:21PM -0500,
> gnomemeeting-list-request gnome org wrote: Content-Description:
> GnomeMeeting-list Digest, Vol 20, Issue 35
>
> > From: Allan <amau sympatico ca>
> > Subject: [GnomeMeeting-list] Why all the #%$ *(*& dependencies
> > I can understand why it was useful at one time to have all these
> > libraries. Storage was expensive, etc.  But now, storage is dirt cheap. 
> > So can someone give me a rational explanation as to why developers simply
> > don't include everything needed in the packages they produce?  For
> > example, if I recall correctly, Opera comes in two flavours - statically
> > linked and dynamically linked.  The statically linked package is somewhat
> > larger, but so what?
>
> In a multitasking environment it makes sense to have as much code as
> possible to be shared between other applications. Just think if every
> GNOME program would be statically linked and you would be (not even
> knowinig) a heavy GNOME user. You would easily need gigabytes of RAM memory
> just in a normal office or home computer, or otherwise the system would
> swap intolerably much often.
>
Good point.  I didn't appreciate the load that could be placed on ram.