[Fedora-packaging] static subpackages (was: sparse 0.2, headers and static lib)

Patrice Dumas pertusus at free.fr
Wed Dec 6 00:29:51 UTC 2006

On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 03:59:32PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> You also need to writeup your reasons for having a static library in the
> first place and presenting it to FESCo.  The fact that Jeff Garzik wants

I know this has allready been voted, but I still think that it is wrong,
it is really a technical issue and not a political one as this thread once
more shows. static libs are allready discouraged, I don't think it is 
relevant to ask fesco for inclusion of every lib, packagers should be
responsible enough.

> to use it is a two edged sword -- on the one hand it means there is a
> need for the library.  OTOH, it means that the library is going to be
> used by multiple programs which is what leads to the security and other
> problems.

Is libsparse going to be involved in situations where security matters?
I guess not? 


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list