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

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Wed Dec 6 04:29:00 UTC 2006

On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 01:10 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 03:59:32PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 00:32 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > static subpackages have been discussed a bit in the recent past, but
> > > not by the packaging group.
> > Actually, I think we voted on this:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/StaticLinkage
> > 
> > My memory is backed up by the status on:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GuidelinesTodo
> Oops, sorry I must have missed that meeting and I'm spreading lies now
> (I thought I had checked all available minutes when I couldn't make it
> to a meeting).
> But it only contains a proposal on the naming of the package, some
> parts like the intradependencies of subpackages should also be part of
> the guidelines.
This was intentional - I wanted us to focus on "-devel" and "-static"
and to prevent us from getting lost into discussions on details.

>  Maybe Ralf could extend this part?
Could be done - C.f. my other mail.

I could add this as a "recommendation section" to the proposal, if there
should be consensus about this.

However, I don't want to end up in threads discussing all glory details
of sorting out "shared/commons" packages or to see people starting
nit-picking on package names, packages might have inherited from their
history, nor do I see much use in us trying to detail all implications
this might have on packaging in practice in advance.

If there should be problems, they'll pop up sooner or later and can be
solved then.


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list