[Ffmpeg-devel] [RFC] dlopen vs linking for external libraries

[Måns Rullgård]

Michael Niedermayer <michaelni at gmx.at> writes:

> Hi
>
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 07:44:57PM +0100, Diego Biurrun wrote:
>> This topic just came up while talking with Mans on IRC..
>> 
>> Currently we have two different methods of integrating external
>> libraries: dlopen or (dynamic) linking.  Or rather some libs offer one
>> option or the other or both.  libfaad supports both variants, liba52
>> just dlopen after my last changes, the others just linking.
>> 
>> So the question is if we should drop dlopen or not.  Mans is in favor, I
>> tend to agree.  In any case we should be consistent.
>> 
>> Opinions?
>
> keep dlopen and drop linking if you want to drop something, i really hate
> it if a application has 500 dependancies which you have to install even
> though you dont use any of them or having 500 variants of a application
>
> of course you could argue that we should not care about binary packages
> but only support things compiled from source ...

We're talking about optional stuff that has to be explicitly
--enabled, and the relevant code won't build without the libs (well,
the headers) installed, so I don't really see a problem with
dependencies here.  If you don't have the lib, don't enable the
feature.  Simple.

-- 
M?ns Rullg?rd
mans at mansr.com