On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 00:56 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 13:16 +0900, Jens Petersen wrote: > > > >>Christopher Aillon wrote: > >> > >>>Let's get rid of static libs where we can. But there's no need to force > >>>people to move things around in packages. Firefox, Mozilla, > >>>Thunderbird, etc. ABSOLUTELY CANNOT BUILD without the static lib of > >>>nspr. Sure, that is a bug that is worth fixing, however, moving the > >>>static lib out of nspr-devel currently makes nspr-devel USELESS, so I > >>>see no point in doing this if people will need to install the -static > >>>package anyway to make use of the -devel package. > >> > >>Ok, sure there will have to be exceptions and nspr will be one of them. :) > > > > Why? Ship a nspr-static instead of nspr-devel. > Obviously, in both cases we disservice the developer. The real > solution is to fix things to not require the static libs, Right. > and just simply remove them, not to hack around it by adding -static > packages. That just causes confusion. No, it just makes package bugs/deficiencies obvious. If it affects mozilla, firefox and friends, so be it ... what shall I say ... design probs therein. Ralf
