1 |
On Sun, 18 Sep 2011 18:39:32 -0400 |
2 |
Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
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". -mike |
22 |
|
23 |
Where is that policy? AFAIK the policy was to 'follow upstream' which |
24 |
usually means 'shared only'. I really don't see a reason to build |
25 |
static libtorrent as upstream even doesn't support static linking. |
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
Best regards, |
29 |
Michał Górny |