On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 06:59 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote: > Matthias Saou wrote: > > > 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) > > As long as the static lib doesn't change the behavior of (most) typical > builds using > BuildRequires: DirectFB-devel > I'd say a separate package is overkill. I'd say packaging static libs into separate *-static packages should be made mandatory to * make such dependencies apparent (otherwise the next maintainer will want to drop them from *-devel and nobody will notice until somebody who can't resist linking against them will yell). * avoid bloating the distro with unnecessary libs (Almost nobody will use them). * make packages providing static libs obvious. Besides this: Is using a userspace library such as DirectFB inside of initrd useful? I hardly can't imagine why. Ralf -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
