Static Useflag by default ?

[iBormuth]

My notebook recently failed to reboot after running "emerge -uD world" which upgraded libaal to 1.0.4. Reiser4progs still linked to "/lib/libaal-1.0.so.3.0.0" which had been removed and died.
I know I could have been run revdep-rebuild. Nevertheless I thought about adding the static useflag to make.conf to prevent similar situations in the future (especially on the remote server).
I found that static is used by about 200 packages including also bigger applications as opera, evolution, mysql (see http://public.efil.de/static.txt for list).
Why is static not a default? Wouldn't that especially make sense on servers. Is there any disadvantage using it globally? Why is it not reserved for vital packages?

Thanks.

[erikm]

The disadvantage is pretty obvious; the "static" flag completely defeats the whole idea of dynamic linking. It would cause binaries to bloat enormously. However, reading your post I think it should be set as default for certain crucial packages, like the filesystem programs.

EDIT: Should'nt an -uD rebuild the programs dependent on packages it upgrades? I would say that is where the problem is...

[iBormuth]

200 Packages out of 8000 on my system (with most of the 200 being vital ones) suggests a intention to use static as default. Does anybody know of any official statement on the toppic?

[iBormuth]

Shouldn't there be two flags (e. g. static and critical) to clearify things ?
Critical would also build static but would only be used for boot and login critical packages as fsch or ssh.