Menu
On 'C', Linux,
Do I need static libraries to statically link, or the shared ones I have suffice? If not, why not? (Don't they contain the same data?)
749
If you have a lot of files, multiple copies of a static library means an increase in the executable file's size. If, however, the benefits of execution time outweigh the need to save space, the static library is the way to go.
In computer science, a static library or statically-linked library is a set of routines, external functions and variables which are resolved in a caller at compile-time and copied into a target application by a compiler, linker, or binder, producing an object file and a stand-alone executable.
Library references are more efficient because the library procedures are statically linked into the program. Static linking increases the file size of your program, and it may increase the code size in memory if other applications, or other copies of your application, are running on the system.
Yes, you need static libraries to build a statically linked executable.
Static libraries are bundles of compiled objects. When you statically link with to library, it is effectively the same as taking the compilation results of that library, unpacking them in your current project, and using them as if they were your own objects.
Dynamic libraries are already linked. This means that some information like relocations have already been fixed up and thrown out.
Additionally, dynamic libraries must be compiled as position-independent code. This is not a restriction on static libraries, and results in a significant difference in performance on some common platforms (like x86).
There exist tools like ELF Statifier which attempt to bundle dynamically-linked libraries into a dynamically-linked executable, but it is very difficult to generate a correctly-working result in all circumstances.
75
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
