[Fedora-packaging] Re: paragraph on shipping static numerical libs updated

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Sat Jun 2 21:31:05 UTC 2007

On Sat, Jun 02, 2007 at 04:24:07PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "AT" == Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> writes:
> AT> The problem is that the packager of libfoofastmem may not know
> AT> that building the unpackaged supernumberbar and bazcrunch requires
> AT> libfoofastmem. E.g. the people that know where a static lib is
> AT> needed are not the packagers, but the consumers.
> That line of reasoning leads to us shipping every static library we
> possibly can, just because something we don't know about might use it.

Yes, that's correct.

> Either the packager knows the static library is needed, or someone's
> going to have to tell them it's needed.

Let's try this that way, e.g. act on demand. Maybe that should be
briefly mentioned in the guideline as well: If users notice that they
require a static lib they should contact the maintainer and give the
reason both for the maintainer to decide, as well as for the comment.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20070602/93d57c4f/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list