Re: FYI: intent to NMU to fix SDL + static X extension library problem
On Sun, 07 Oct 2001, Philippe Troin wrote:
> For reference, which says:
> *** begin quote
> In general, libraries must have a shared version in the library package
> and a static version in the development package. The shared version
> must be compiled with '-fPIC', and the static version must not be
> (source files will thus typically need to be compiled twice).
>
> In some cases, it is acceptable for a library to be available in static
> form only; these cases include:
> * libraries for languages whose shared library support is immature or
> unstable;
> * libraries whose interfaces are in flux or under development (commonly
> the case when the library's major version number is zero, or where the
> ABI breaks across patchlevels);
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
> * libraries which are explicitly intended to be available only in static
> form by their upstream author(s)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Either restart the flamewar with upstream XFree86 about this, or leave it
alone. They want it static, we will ship it static.
> *** end quote
>
> ...and which I disagree with.
It's Debian policy. It matters not that you disagree with it, unless you
are going to do something actually constructive about it (such as requesting
it to be changed based on strong technical reasons). Otherwise, please do
not waste time and bandwidth.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: