readme/faq: document rlib crate type better
#1356
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks. |
|
👍 will do so when I get a chance |
davidhewitt
force-pushed
the
integration-tests-faq
branch
from
53e419f to
c1c4a5f
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This simplifies the documentation around
cdylibandrlibcrate types in the readme and includes a similar note in the FAQ as #1336 .I think that
rlibcrate type is the best solution - I tested manually and this works great for me locally.I think the issue described in #1336 (comment) is likely a result of some static linking, because the error is talking about relocating a symbol incorrectly. This is probably prevented by #1347.
Closes #1321
Closes #1336