On 05/11/2010 10:03 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > Basically OK, except of the naming proposal (libpic-foo.a etc.). > > -1 in its current shape, because this would > a) break with tradional usage of static libs. > b) would require intrusive works on some packages' sources. > > +1 with the library naming scheme removed. I don't know how you accomplish shipping both PIC and nonPIC versions of the same shared lib without renaming the library. I'm open to alternative suggestions. ~spot -- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
