Re: [gentoo-dev] Does anyone want|need a static (lib)perl still?

[Michael Cummings]

On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 09:52 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> if the lib is meant to be used by other packages, then a static version should
> probably be offered for people who want to build static binaries ... although
> atm, the libperl ebuild doesnt actually produce a libperl.a does it ?  and
> the perl ebuild installs libperl.a into a private directory which isnt really
> accessible to packages ...
> -mike
>
Right - libperl [the ebuild] builds the shared library, and perl [the
ebuild] builds and links against libperl.a, and places it back in its
private area (in a surreal world this is where libperl.so is supposed to
live also, so that you can have multiple libperl's on your box, but
that's a different flame fest and my toes are still toasting from this
morning). And since that libperl.a is only visible to those who know to
find it...my question comes full circle on whether anyone out there is
actively seeking out and using the static libperl.a :) I have no
intention of proposing dropping something that's being used - but if the
gist is that one guy on oslo is using it check disk sectors because it
meets his mythical needs for the perfect file size, and that's it, i'd
like to clean up the dual ebuild scenario (which causes its own
problems).

Bah. Way too much thinking involved.

~mcummings