Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: glibc 2.2. version?

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 01:24:45AM -0500, Deliverable Mail wrote:
> How about a static version then?

We used to do this.  It turns out that the glibc folks think that
building things statically is dumb, and don't care whether it works or
not.  As a consequence, it doesn't.  (In particular, there are
problems with the ip name resolver code.  We used to ship our own
resolver just so we could still do static builds, but configuration
skew between how people expect names to be resolved and how our
resolver resolved them turned out to be too much...)

-- Nathaniel

-- 
Details are all that matters; God dwells there, and you never get to
see Him if you don't struggle to get them right. -- Stephen Jay Gould