On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 11:01:45PM +0900, Mamoru Tasaka wrote: > > I thought that in this case using "BuildRequires: foo-static" > was _mandatory_ ... > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries > > Quoted: > Packages which explicitly need to link against the static version _must_ > BuildRequire: foo-static, so that the usage can be tracked. Well, my interpretation of that is that the BuildRequires foo-static is here to track packages that must link against a static library, that is, that cannot link against a shared library. Those that can link against either a shared or a static library (even if the shared library doesn't exist yet) should BuildRequires -devel. However, rereading https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Programs_which_don.27t_need_to_notify_FESCo it seems that I am wrong and indeed the BuildRequires should be foo-static. I have a bunch of nonconformant packages, then... In any case I think that those guidelines cannot really be effective without tools to automatically find out non conformant packages, that is the aim of my script. -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
