[Fedora-packaging] Clarification of Static Libraries packaging guidelines

Michael Schwendt mschwendt at gmail.com
Sat Dec 5 18:18:47 UTC 2009

On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 19:00:50 +0100, Patrice wrote:

> There should be no foo-devel-static. But I am not sure that there is a need
> to change the guideline since it doesn't mention the devel-static 
> possibility.

So, we should get rid of the six remaining -devel-static packages then.
One is in F12 "updates", btw. ;)  One at RPM Fusion.

Though, without hanging around on IRC I still don't know whether I could
simply go ahead and fix the packages for F13 devel or if this would be
a case of filing tickets and waiting many months for a reaction.

> But once again, I think that the guidelines are clear on that subject:

Well, I do too, but that's the theory only as I've found two review
requests that create the full set of libfoo, libfoo-static + virtual
libfoo-devel and libfoo-devel-static in libfoo-static.

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list