Re: Static libs (was: Re: Approval needed again: SCIM)

[Bill Nottingham <notting redhat com>]

Ville Skyttä (ville skytta iki fi) said: 
> On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 20:02 +0900, Jens Petersen wrote:
> 
> > (I'm actually planning to propose for FC5 to move (all) static
> > libs to -static subpackages in order to make -devel packages lighter.)
> 
> FWIW, you have my +1 on that.  Additionally in the vast majority of
> cases, static libs wouldn't even be needed in the first place... but
> suggesting dropping them or disabling the -static subpackages by
> default, guarded by "--with static" or somesuch rpmbuild flag might be
> too controversial... or would it, WDYT?

Most -static stuff can just go away, yes.

For example, we ship a static libgnome, but no static gtk2. Which
doesn't really make sense...

Bill