On 07/27/2005 11:55 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 10:53 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote:
and provide me with a patch to let Firefox build
against the shared nspr libs instead of the static nspr libs, as that
would obviate this entire discussion.
I am too long in this business to fall into this old rhetorical trick
from the "1000 tricks to get rid of customers in 1st level support" grab
bag - I am not going to solve your bugs.
It's not a trick. You're the one that's unabashedly trying to force
things down my throat. If you want it this badly, prove it and do the
work. This is how open source has come to thrive.
When you once should be shipping a shared libnspr, you could reorganize
the packages this way:
So, I think I see your confusion. You appear to think I only ship
static libs, but that is not so. I currently ship a shared AND a static
library. Right now, nobody links against the shared lib, only the
static lib. You are proposing that because nothing does that right now,
I should rename -devel to -static, but that would force people who want
to write their own app against the shared nspr libs to use the -static
package which is very badly broken. If I go ahead and add a -static
package, that would force every CURRENT consumer that is forced to build
against the static libary (firefox, et. al) to get both the -devel AND
the -static package which (beating a dead horse) is also broken. You
should need only the -devel package. Refer to the three-act play.
There is nothing else I really can say here unless there is a patch
available to make the current consumers use the shared lib. I will not
be further replying to this discussion.
