From: ptkwt@... (Phil Tomson)
Date: 2004-09-30T09:40:04+09:00
Subject: Re: Purely static build of Ruby

In article <1096501697.454462.174890@k26g2000oda.googlegroups.com>,
rcoder@gmail.com <rcoder@gmail.com> wrote:
>At least with 1.8.2-preview2, the Ruby OpenSSL module won't compile
>statically, even with the static libs for OpenSSL installed on the
>system. That was the source of the 'krb5_*' symbol errors I mentioned
>in the initial post.

It could be that you need a different version of OpenSSL.  You might want 
to check with whoever it is that makes the OpenSSL bindings for Ruby.

Perhaps you need libkrb5.a ?

Also, have you tried with 1.8.1 ?

>
>I think that, in general, requiring the IA-32 compatibility RPMs *may*
>be an option, but requires going outside the small group I'm working in
>to additional product teams, since the tool I'm developing is an add-on
>utility, not a standalone application.

Yeah, it's a pain.

>
>In other words, the footprint and compatibility issues are key only
>because we're supposed to add seamlessly onto the existing software,
>without any major new dependencies or bloat.
>
>Just to make things even more interesting, we not only have to support
>Linux on IA-32 and Itanium with a single binary, we also have to
>support Windows on both architectures with the same code base, and
>provide GUI functionality on all of them.

Just when you get all of this working Intel will drop the Itanium ;-)

Actually, now that HP has dropped the Itanium it's only a matter of 
time... (and HP was the instigator of the Itanium in the first place, so 
Intel can't be too happy about this) 


Phil