static libraries/devel subpackages

[Linus Walleij]

On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Patrice Dumas wrote:

> Should it really be followed? I may be wrong but all the packages I know
> in extra distribute the static libraries in -devel subpackages.

I actually followed that in my (yet only) package libnjb. Though I thought 
it was odd. Removing the libtool archives (*.la) is more understandable 
though.

I believe the reasoning is that use of dynamic libraries should be 
encouraged, and RPMs in extras should only use dynamic libs, thus no need 
to include static libs. (Qualified guess.)

> * when the package consists only in static libraries, no binaries nor dynamic
>  libraries what should be done? (I think that the principal package should
>  not distribute any file such that there is only a -devel package. It is
>  what libcaca does.)

Seems reasonable to me... Could one not just name the main package 
"foo-devel" then, with no "main" package whatsoever?

Linus