From <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries> == Packaging Static Libraries == “Packages including libraries SHOULD exclude static libs as far as possible (eg by configuring with --disable-static). Applications linking against libraries SHOULD link against shared libraries not static versions.” * I would like to suggest this advice be reconsidered * The second guideline seems fine; a packaged application (executable) SHOULD link against the shared/dynamic version of a system library. But this second guideline does not need the first; and I can see little reason for the first. Since static libraries should end up in their own seperate *-static packages, I see very little advantage in excluding them. Linkers have always (since the dawn of dynamic linking) preferred shared/dynamic libraries over static versions. The mere presence of a libfoo.a file along side a libfoo.so file will have no effect on executables created. * Compelling reason for static libraries * The ability for a developer using a Fedora system to create static executables, or to link one or more libraries statically in an otherwise dynamic executable, is a very useful capability. There are many advantages to static executables. Maybe this is all TL;DR so see: <https://digilicious.com/static.html>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ packaging mailing list -- packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to packaging-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/DYGMR3WGWMCGE6BA2OAM2ICQOWXGWXXB/
