Jess Trang <lists / ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> I'm building a lot of ruby servers - I just want to understand if there
> are any negative implications of configuring with the "--enable-shared"
> option?

It's a little slower (we're having a discussion in ruby-core related
to it, too).

[1] http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/60378

> The "--enable-shared" option will "build a shared library for Ruby" and
> I
> understand there are some apps/gems that require option to be set to
> give them access to native stuff via ruby.

Which ones?  gems can link to the static library just fine in the
default install.

Most Linux distributions will package a shared one to save space and
improve upgradability, though.  There is no need to rebuild all C
extension gems to fix a bug in dynamic libruby.

> Essentially I can not find any negative impact to using it, but then I
> don't quite follow why it isn't enabled by default..?

Dynamic libraries are still a little slower (you may not notice).

> For instance could there be some implications if I build with
> "--enable-shared" and then update packages on the server (or even
> rebuild a new version) at a later date - could this cause orphan issues
> or anything?

It's probably more prone to human error in case you use different
build options (or Ruby developers accidentally break something :x).