Currently both static and dynamic libraries are created for the tools. If I understand it correctly, using dynamic libraries would not work (with version 0.9) because of some implementation details in the bg_ tools. Therefore, this PR only deletes the .so files for now. (The dynamic libraries also break something in our current implementation.)
However, from my point of view it would make sense to switch to dynamic linking. At least in our case, bg_setenv is not the only binary that is linked against libebgenv. What is planned for the future in this regard?
Currently both static and dynamic libraries are created for the tools. If I understand it correctly, using dynamic libraries would not work (with version 0.9) because of some implementation details in the bg_ tools. Therefore, this PR only deletes the .so files for now. (The dynamic libraries also break something in our current implementation.)
However, from my point of view it would make sense to switch to dynamic linking. At least in our case, bg_setenv is not the only binary that is linked against libebgenv. What is planned for the future in this regard?