[Fedora-packaging] Re: paragraph on shipping static numerical libs
nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net
Mon May 28 16:10:36 UTC 2007
Le lundi 28 mai 2007 à 17:24 +0200, Patrice Dumas a écrit :
> On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 05:12:55PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > Replace one can not with it's too much hassle to and you'll see where I
> > was going. Reduce the hassle factor doing things right and suddenly
> > static libs will get less attractive.
> Ok. What will be replacing them?
Help create properly autotooled rpm transparently for people that don't
care about infrastructure stuff. You already have cluster managers that
use rpm as a payload. That takes care of the deployment, of the
interfering stuff in /usr/local, etc
> In any case I doubt it may be as simple as what we have with static
> libs, with statically linked executables created by adding -static to
> the link command line...
You focus too much on the current technical solution and not enough on
user needs. The problem is not to replicate the same old & broken
solution ad vitam eternam but to make the correct technical solution
attractive enough for users to switch.
I won't share nuggets of ass-backwards common wisdom here, that would
strike to close to my employer systems, but sometimes you need to
re-asses why a particular solution was chosen at a time and if you can
not achieve the original goals better now with stuff that was not
available a decade ago.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
More information about the Fedora-packaging