I think I get the users point by guessing and extrapolating:
Some large-scale installations will have something like /usr/local mounted
onto a share in order to provide common applications for all users
through this share. This is an old (IMHO bad) habit especially of former
SunOS sysadmins. It is especially comfortable when installing a lot of 3rd
party binary-only software. Many will use something like "modules" to set
up a lot of userland variables to get this going etc.
This means a user of several distributions and different versions of the
same distribution will need to compile things statically to get them work
somewhat on all Linux machines that mounts this share, given that their
ABI:s may vary wildly.
So while these people appreciate dynamic linking for the most common stuff
that sits on the local client, they still want static linking available
for their sysadmin daily tasks like this.
While such people have a niche use of static libs, we all know that the
actual USE of static libs require a lot of hands-on and funny compiler
flags.
For this reason I think these people are very able of installing the whole
shebang and its dependencies from source and not ask their distributor to
provide them with tools for this. Alternatively use another distribution
which love to build things from source (Slackware, Gentoo) for this work:
it is more fitted and not Fedora's ecological niche.
So if reasons like this is behind these request, IMHO we should just say
"no" to static libs...
My Euro 0.01
Linus
--
fedora-extras-list mailing list
fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
