Re: [HACKERS] building libpq.a static library

On 12 July 2017 at 23:46, Jeroen Ooms <jeroen@berkeley.edu> wrote:

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Jeroen Ooms <jeroen@berkeley.edu> writes:
>> I maintain static libraries for libpq for the R programming language
>> (we need static linking to ship with the binary packages).
>
> How do you get that past vendor packaging policies?  When I worked at
> Red Hat, there was a very strong policy against allowing any package
> to statically embed parts of another one, because it creates serious
> management problems if e.g. the other one needs a security update.
> I'm sure Red Hat isn't the only distro that feels that way.

We only use this on Windows. On platforms with a decent package
manager we indeed link to a shared library.

You shouldn't ever need static libraries on Windows, though. Because it searches the CWD first on its linker search path