[Fedora-packaging] paragraph on shipping static numerical libs updated
rc040203 at freenet.de
Sun Jun 3 08:02:39 UTC 2007
On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 19:58 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> Here is an updated version of the paragraph about shipping static
> numerical libs taking into account the comments on the first version.
> The objective is to have this included in
> at the end of 'Packaging Static Libraries'.
> * in the case of user compiled programs doing numerical computations or
> data analysis, using static libraries may be useful. Indeed it allows
> to build static executables that have more chance to be run on other
> platforms than the box they were compiled in, that have different
> dynamic library versions or even that don't have the library installed
> at all. At the same time those applications, in general, don't need
> the features brought in by shared libraries (no need for nss, no
> security issue, no need for iconv...). Therefore it may be acceptable
> or even desirable to ship static libraries for numerical and data
> processing libraries to help users needing to link statically their
> locally compiled executables. The static libraries still need to be
> in separate sub-packages and this doesn't means that the executables
> packaged in Fedora should be link statically, this is only for users
> linking locally their own programs.
> Some packagers feel that this is not the right solution for locally
> compiled programs portability, since it is not general (doesn't work
> with nss, iconv...). However a general solution doesn't seems to exist
1. This proposal is not in the distro's interest, because it causes
2. This proposal's focus on "numerical libs" is silly.
It tries to implement a special exception into the FPC based on an
application domain, while the problem actually is application domain
The real problem is: Cross-distro packaging of local packages, which
some people (bogusly) try to approach static linkage.
More information about the Fedora-packaging