On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 12:17 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "RC" == Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > RC> In addition to all this, another issue has popped up, which IMO > RC> renders shipping static libs as part of Fedora very questionable > RC> (to say the least) > RC> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209316 > > Surely this is a bug in RPM, RH's rpm maintainers don't seem to agree, they closed it "WONTFIX" :( > though, and shouldn't block otherwise > acceptable packages. Well, the resulting debuginfo package was empty and the resulting packages were not source-level debugable via debuginfo*.rpm. To me this sufficed to block a package due to bugs in its infrastructure. If GCC was misscompiling a particular package you probably would have done the same. Worse, more general, meanwhile, I am almost certain all static libs are not source-level debugable with debuginfo rpms due to this bug in rpm. I do not want to block further packages due to this, nevertheless this to me is a severe bug, further decreasing my willingness to tolerate static libs and static linkage during reviews. Ralf -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
