Re: Packaging sysfsutils: static library?
On Oct 13, Martin Pitt <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> BTW, I may have been missing something as I did not read the beginning
>> of this thread, but I don't see the point of packaging sysfsutils:
>It is a separate upstream package.
Then feel free to package it, as long as I keep udev I don't mind. :-)
Back to the topic, I think you should discuss with the upstream author
the reasons for having no shared library. If he is only waiting for a
stable ABI then I think you should really keep the library static.
>> (which I ITP'ed some weeks ago)
>Am I missing something? bugs.d.o/wnpp does not contain the word
>'udev' and only once 'sysfs' (#215257, the ITP I'm talking about). I
Probably I only sent mail to debian-devel, I was expecting to upload it
Marco | [2365 acrToiAT0AyME]