1 |
On Wednesday, September 21, 2011 12:36:57 Thomas Kahle wrote: |
2 |
> On 09:10 Mon 19 Sep 2011, Michał Górny wrote: |
3 |
> > On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:39:32 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Sunday, September 18, 2011 18:16:30 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: |
5 |
> > > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 2:25 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
6 |
> > > > > '$(use_enable static-libs static)' themselves. While at it, it |
7 |
> > > > > may be better to just drop the flag if no other package relies on |
8 |
> > > > > it and no user has ever requested the static build of that |
9 |
> > > > > package. |
10 |
> > > > |
11 |
> > > > I don't see any harm with including IUSE="static-libs" for every |
12 |
> > > > package that has working/usable static libraries[1]. Why wait for |
13 |
> > > > users to request it on bugzilla when it's a near-zero-cost and |
14 |
> > > > zero-maintenance to add it to ebuilds? |
15 |
> > > |
16 |
> > > i missed this sentence from Michał's e-mail. unconditionally not |
17 |
> > > building static libraries is against policy. if you install shared |
18 |
> > > libs that get linked against, then you must provide static libraries |
19 |
> > > unconditionally as well or support IUSE=static-libs. maintainers do |
20 |
> > > not get to choose "no one has asked for it and no one in the tree is |
21 |
> > > using it thus my ebuild isnt going to". |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > Where is that policy? AFAIK the policy was to 'follow upstream' |
24 |
> |
25 |
> Really? For scientific libraries this means 'static only'. |
26 |
|
27 |
maybe i read too many memes nowadays, but this makes me want to: |
28 |
statically link ALL the libraries! |
29 |
-mike |