static libs ... again
Ralf Corsepius
rc040203 at freenet.de
Fri Feb 17 19:30:43 UTC 2006
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 14:04 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> Quentin Spencer wrote:
> > So, not too long ago someone asked why I still had static libs in one of
> > my packages since they are "banned" or at least strongly discouraged, so
> > I started removing them from my packages. All of the libraries I
> > maintain are math libraries, so security concerns are a non-issue. After
> > removing the static libs from fftw-devel, it took less than 24 hours to
> > get a bug report asking for them back. See
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181897 for the
> > reasoning.
> It seems theirs is a rather specific and unique case. Should we change
> policy to accommodate corner cases like that?
Why? Because a user says he can't build some applications statically?
What kind of rationale is this? Where is the technical explanation?
Ralf
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list