linking statically against dietlibc: a blocker?
Patrice Dumas
pertusus at free.fr
Tue Oct 3 21:09:47 UTC 2006
Hello,
3 packages submitted by Enrico are under review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176579
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176581
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176582
Enrico linked these small daemons statically with dietlibc.
Other contributors disagree with this choice, but I think that the
situation should be clarified once for all, and it should said
whether this is a blocker or not.
My personal point of view is that linking statically (and against
dietlibc) shouldn't be a blocker if
* the maintainer is aware of the security implications, and
that he has to follow the security issues regarding the package
linked statically against and rebuild as soon as it is out,
* there is a gain in term of efficiency (and potentially portability).
And it should be well understood that these are exceptions.
Of course the submitter has still to agree with that.
--
Pat
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list