https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094422 --- Comment #8 from Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #5) > A static package may also be good to include. See for example: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libtiff/blob/rawhide/f/libtiff.spec There are a few static libraries in Fedora where they are absolutely required for technical reasons. However, “In general, packagers SHOULD NOT ship static libraries.”[1] (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #6) > Explicit file lists may also be helpful > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_explicit_lists I think I already have explicit file lists in this case. There are no broad globs under shared directories. I package an entire directory owned by the package in > %{_includedir}/libaiff/ which I could write instead as > %dir %{_includedir}/libaiff > %{_includedir}/libaiff/config.h > %{_includedir}/libaiff/endian.h > %{_includedir}/libaiff/libaiff.h but I don’t think that verbosity would prevent any likely mistakes. The linked guideline doesn’t ask packagers to list every file in a package-owned directory, only to avoid broad globs in shared directories. The listing of shared library files is consistent with https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_listing_shared_library_files; it includes the library name and does not glob over the shared library version. > Static library can probably be skipped, it seems newer libraries do not > include this: > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libwebp/blob/rawhide/f/libwebp.spec > > Maybe the assembly files can be removed? They do not seem to take advantage > of modern processor features. I helped upstream update the build system to support shared libraries and .so versioning[2], and, in one of our email conversations, the author specifically expressed their appreciation that I preserved support for compiling these platform-specific assembly routines. It’s an open question whether these routines actually improve performance on newer processors and compilers, but I think it’s best to preserve them in the spirit of staying close to upstream[3]. [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_packaging_static_libraries [2] https://github.com/mtszb/libaiff/pull/1 [3] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Staying_Close_to_Upstream_Projects/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094422 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
