On 14/03/17 20:15 +0000, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
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.
If glibc-static was removed from Fedora and that change propagated to
RHEL I know of companies that might stop being customers of Red Hat.
Being unable to statically link their applications would be a
showstopper for some, and would cause them to move to a different
distro.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
