Hi, Regarding this bug : https://bugzilla.redhat.com/204568 It does makes sense to ship the DirectFB static libraries for some users. So here are my questions : - Should they be put into the existing -devel sub-package? - Should they be put into a new separate sub-package? (-static) I'm asking because since it's not really for "development", it would make sense to split it out in a new sub-package. Also, that way it would avoid any possible scenario where something rebuilding against DirectFB would "accidentally" link statically instead of dynamically. Thoughts? Some existing guideline I might have missed? Matthias -- Clean custom Red Hat Linux rpm packages : http://freshrpms.net/ Fedora Core release 5.92 (FC6 Test3) - Linux kernel 2.6.17-1.2647.fc6 Load : 0.08 0.12 0.12 -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
