In attempting to build a completely static ruby, I’ve discovered a few
I’ve built static versions of readline, zlib, iconv, dbm, and openssl.
My intention is to build a completely static ruby, including all
If you build openssl with zlib support, then Ruby’s ext/openssl
extension will not build. This is because the extconf.rb needs to
include “-lz”. Note, if your libssl.a is build without zlib, Ruby
does attempt to build ext/openssl. This only happens when you build
libssl.a with zlib support.
In the openssl extension, I suggest adding a test to see if “-lz” (zlib)
exists. If it does, then include “-lz” on all of the subsequent openssl
specific tests. I don’t exactly know how to do this due to
unfamiliarity with Ruby’s extension build system.
When using a static openssl library (libssl.a), and all static
extensions (–with-static-linked-ext), the openssl digest functions
(SHA) conflict with the same named symbols in ext/digest. I imagine
this works fine under the non-static case because the symbols are
resolved at runtime; however, in the static case, the symbols must be
unique at link time – and they are not.
I don’t know about this one either - because Ruby’s build system is
already somewhat of a magical mystery to me. However, it seems that we
need a mechanism to automagically choose which lib to link. In the case
of a static libssl.a, the ext/digest functions should be considered
If anyone knows anything about this, or has had similar experience,
please let me know. Furthermore, if there’s a more appropriate place to
send this kind of thing than ruby-talk, let me know that too.