Re: [Plib-devel] Creating shared libs or plib under Linux

[Hans de G. <j.w...@hh...>]

Bram Stolk wrote:
> I believe that it was Steve Baker's intention to do static only,
> to avoid issues with incompatibilities.
> 
> Basically, static libs are more foolproof.
> 

Actually static libs are a very good ways to keep being bitten by old
bugs. What happens when a static lib gets a bugfix? Either all packages
build against the previous version must be rebuild, or they keep the bug.

> Then again, is plib LGPL?
> If so, you cannot create a commercial game with plib and use
> a static lib. LGPL requires dynamic libs.
> 

Yes PLIB is LGPL, but that is a rather black and white explanation of
the LGPL (I'm not saying its wrong though).

But you seem to be the most active plib developer at the moment, are you
interested in a patch adding sharedlib support. (Notice this will
require that you keep the ABI to plib stable between major releases.
Expanidng is ok, changing not. See my fullscreen patch as an example how
you can safely expand the ABI (99% == API)).

Regards,

Hans