On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 07:46:38PM +0000, Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On 14 March 2017 at 17:57, Christopher <ctubbsii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Despite such simple to fix bug using static libraries should be removed. > > > > Your comment makes me wonder if there is *any* appropriate use of > > boost-static. If not, why is it even packaged? > > I'd be happy to accept your help patching what upstream is doing to move > > from boost-static to boost-test (I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable about > > C/C++ tooling to switch on my own), but since the dependency is limited to > > unit testing during the build, I think it's probably fine. > > > > This problem is waaaay bigger than you may be thinking. Above it is only > tip of the iceberg .. > > # dnf list | grep -- -static | grep -c x86_64 > 196 The problem being what exactly? > One of the most bizarre IMO static packages is glibc-static. The problem being what exactly? > By this compilation of the glibc package is probably almost two times > longer than it could be. OK, so we suffer that problem only once (during the glibc build). But it's a benefit to have glibc-static because it enables people to build staticly linked programs. These are very useful for building embedded systems, initramfses, static linked binaries of large proprietary programs, and any case where you don't want to depend on the system libraries. > If package like glibc-static will be still propagated to commercial RH > sooner or later it will blow up into the face RH support as some customer > will have some issue with some his own binary linked against some ancient > version of glibc static library still used on some quite fresh distro > resources It's nice that you're thinking so much about Red Hat and their support problems, but I think Red Hat can deal with that themselves. In the case you describe it wouldn't be a supported configuration and there would be no support issues. > Solutions: > > 1) Of course get rid of *ALL* -static packages with all roots like this one > in binutils. That's a terrible idea. > 2) Probably it would be not so bad to add at the end of rpms package > assembly process print kind of big warning that someone is trying to build > package which will provide static libraries. Also a terrible idea. Static libraries are useful in several situations, and we should not disable this capability. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-p2v converts physical machines to virtual machines. Boot with a live CD or over the network (PXE) and turn machines into KVM guests. http://libguestfs.org/virt-v2v _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
