[Fedora-packaging] Re: Re: libtool(.la) archive policy proposal

[Rex Dieter]

Alexandre Oliva wrote:


>> 2.  Good thing we don't package static libs (or at least *strongly*
>> discouraged).
> 
> This is too narrow a vision.
> 
> Fedora is a major development platform for packages that ship
> libtool-using packages for many different platforms.
> 
> If we break libtool such that it still works for us

I fail to see how simply not including static libs (or needless .la files)
in rpms shipped in Fedora, yields the conclusion that we're breaking
libtool.

Or, are you arguing against the existing "no static lib" policy?

-- Rex