On 06/26/2017 02:45 AM, Óscar García Amor wrote: > Hello all, > > Some days ago the pandoc mantainer [1] do a rebuild of it [2] where > add a lot of haskell package dependencies. I think that the build > changes the binary from statically linked to dinamically linked, but > IMHO, I prefer the static one (55,08 MiB of package) over the dinamic > (more than 666 MB in libraries). > > What do you think about this? > > Other solution can be have other package "pandoc-static", that > maintains the previous method of package. > > Greetings. > > [1]: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/pandoc/ > [2]: https://git.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/pandoc&id=d340c92f8cf5686509551c08bcdaa0b5e66760b0 And same with shellcheck -- the general issue is that *all* haskell-based packages now build dynamically linked against the haskell runtime (which is huge, and few people have more than one or two packages that need it). https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=227621 https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=227477 https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=227574 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/54564 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/54590 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/54588 https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/54580 Seems like the official response is "just live with it, no one cares what you say". Which, to be fair, has some justification in that technically speaking, statically-compiled haskell programs were an ugly bug. It's just a pity haskell is such a terribly bloated ecosystem. :p That being said, there are pandoc-lite and shellcheck-static packages in the AUR which use upstream's prebuilt binaries and don't require the whole haskell ecosystem as a dependency. Which seems fairly reasonable to me. -- Eli Schwartz
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
