On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 11:32:09PM -0800, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > Florian La Roche wrote: > >Then we should not remove too many static libs. Some are good candidates > >to only keep the real core (LSB?) libs dynamically loaded. > > Why? This makes no sense. You have to provide arguments for each .a > file. As I said, you cannot even build a graphical application without This is too much work for the maintainers. The issue of static linking should be considered, but asking the packagers to do so much investigation work seems too much to me. It could be a should item, especially if there is a clear documentation on what to search for, but for a must it is too demanding in my opinoin. Static libraries are already discouraged in the guidelines. Does the fact that an application is linked with libdl means that it is useless if linked statically, or is it possible that some features only are unavailable? -- Pat -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
