Re: static libs ... again

[Ed Hill <ed eh3 com>]

Hi folks,

Is there is a middle ground in this static libs discussion?

For instance, are there technical solutions such as:

 - all static libs should or perhaps must be in a -static 
     sub-package
 - no -static sub-packages are allowed as BuildRequires for 
     other FC or FE packages
 - the -static packages are strictly optional so maintainers 
     may provide them or not at their own discretion

that would be acceptable to everyone?

Ed

ps - I realize that I'm currently part of the static libs 
     problem.  The netcdf package, for now, only provides 
     static libs and other packages (eg. ncview, nco, cdo) 
     use them.  I've created patches to netcdf3 that allow 
     it to build shared libs and will either apply them or 
     move to netcdf4 (which has shared lib support) if it 
     gets out of beta relatively soon.

-- 
Edward H. Hill III, PhD
office:  MIT Dept. of EAPS;  Rm 54-1424;  77 Massachusetts Ave.
             Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
emails:  eh3 mit edu                ed eh3 com
URLs:    http://web.mit.edu/eh3/    http://eh3.com/
phone:   617-253-0098
fax:     617-253-4464