Re: compile+link Fujitsu Linux

On Feb 3, 3:31 pm, Robert <n...@xxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 1 Feb 2008 12:58:23 -0800 (PST), Richard <rip...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 1, 7:49 pm, Robert <n...@xxxxxx> wrote:

Actually, to those that use this, it _simplifies_ deployment,
especially in bespoke systems where I operate. If a single program
requires changes then only that file is tested and redistributed. In
any rational development all deployments would be fully tested. If you
link several programs into one library the all those in the library
need to be retested. If they are all linked to one executable then
everything needs to be retested.

There is no reason to re-test an unchanged program just because it is in the same library
with other programs.

Yes there is. If you rebuild a library from one changed program and
several unchanged you are still distributing the whole library and
this replaces the one that is currently in use. There may have been an
error in the build. For example one program may have been unavailable
at the time of the build, or omitted in some other way.

It is the _library_ that is to be tested as well as the changed
program, it is necessary to test that the library contains all that it
should, and in the appropriate condition, before causing your
application to fail with a missing program.

You claim 'greater reliability' for libraries and then fail to deliver
reliability to your users.

Changes in one program can't cause errors in other programs unless they share global data.

Or data in parameters to the CALL of that program or in CALLs that
program makes.

In a rational environment, data is shared between parent and child, not between siblings
and certainly not with stranger programs. You should never make a decision in program A,
store it in an indicator or database, and take action on that decision in program B.
That's bad design.

What nonsense you talk. One program can decide that a customer is to
be put on 'stop supply', it stores this indicator in a database.
Another program takes action based on that descision.

If you DO make that mistake, putting programs A and B in separate files is no more
protection than putting them in the same library. Even running them on separate machines,
as remote procedures, is no protection.

Creating straw-man arguments is no support for your assertions.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: My library is gone! "There are no items in this library yet"
    ... something in the registry that didn't like something in the database and it may have taken the combination of the two to really break it. ... If there was a way to get this to the Windows Media Player product team, it could help in troubleshooting the high number of reportedly corrupt databases. ... Once I saw that WMP was rebuilding the .wmdb file, I exited WMP11 and swapped in my original CurrentDatabse_360.wmdb file. ... WMP11 isn't letting itself access or create any libraries, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)
  • Re: My library is gone! "There are no items in this library yet"
    ... I had begun to formulate an opinion that rebuilding the database does not only fix a corrupted database but also could fix other configuration and settings. ... If there was a way to get this to the Windows Media Player product team, it could help in troubleshooting the high number of reportedly corrupt databases. ... Once I did this, Media Player got unsuck, and rebuilt the folder, along with the CurrentDatabase_360.wmdb file. ... WMP11 isn't letting itself access or create any libraries, ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia.player)
  • Re: type mismatch - 13
    ... DAO library. ... When you convert a database file from an earlier version of Microsoft Access ... make sure that Microsoft Office 2007 Access ... libraries, dimension the objects explicitly as follows: ...
    (microsoft.public.access.modulesdaovba)
  • Re: 2000/2003 Reference Problems
    ... If you use only the essential libraries: ... Decompiling is a separate issue to references. ... >> Then compact the database: ... >> Tools | Database Utilities | Compile. ...
    (microsoft.public.access.modulesdaovba)
  • Re: WMP 11 - Fixing Corrupt WMDB Libraries - Need a Proper Tool!!!!!
    ... It's a fascinating problem - dead libraries are typically non-recoverable and since they're reflective in nature, there's not much call to get them rolling again. ... It saddens me to hear that the Windows Media Player product team feels like the hard work of their customers has no intrinsic value. ... the information from the Microsoft/AMG database is incorrect, ... I have managed database systems using everything from dBase II, III, IV, FoxPro, SQL Server from version 6.0 on, flat file systems, Access database systems, and so on. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsmedia)