Axel Thimm (Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > All I'm saying is that we shouldn't continue to support this sort of > > fundamentally-unsupportable setup ad nauseam - it's time to think about > > how to solve this in a sane manner, rather than continuing to paper > > over the problem. I don't see how, at a minium, moving the static > > libraries to -static packages changes things - if, as you say, everyone > > just chucks libraries manually in /usr/local, then how is this making > > anything worse for them? > > No problem at all with moving away static libs into their subpackage! > But the thread went on to claim that static libs are not useful in > general, and some people including myself just showed the typical use > cases where it makes very much sense to have static libs around. They aren't useful *in general*. It's supporting an outmoded, inefficient mode of use (shuffling libraries and binaries around between machines and OSes), and it's no different than various other outmoded, inefficient, past UNIX-isms. We don't support every app parsing the password file (or more) - we support authenticating via PAM. We don't support making cdrecord setuid - we support fixing the kernel to DTRT. We don't encourage logging in as root to do all tasks - we support consolehelper, and moving to things like consolekit and separated helpers from their UI frontends. We don't support creating specific groups to own devices - we support pam_console and then ACLs added via ConsoleKit. We don't support every single usage case that people want in Fedora - it's about trying to solve the problems in the right ways that scale going forward. Bill -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
