[Fedora-packaging] Static Library Policy Draft Changes

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 09:50 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 09:44:36AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
> > 
> > 2. When a package goes from only providing static libraries to providing
> > some shared libraries (but not all), we want to be able to track these.
> 
> Does it happens?
This happens all the time.

The critical case would be the opposite: A package going from providing
shared libs to providing static libs only.

I have never seen this happen, but provides the craziness of some
upstreams, I would not exclude this to happen.

>  I guess that this is raised by a real life example, but
> is there more than one package providing some library as shared+static
> and some only as static?
This isn't much of a problem.

* If a library's client package BR:'s *-devel,
it will pick up the shared library during the next rebuild.

* If a library's client package BR:'s *-static,
it will bomb out during the next rebuild.


The only issue is library-client packages not being automatically
notified that they might need to be rebuilt. 

To me, this is a negligible, minor issue, your proposal is too heavy
weight for to find it appropriate.

We have way more serious packaging issues than this minor detail.

Ralf