[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Tricky library packaging question

On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 08:18:37PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:

> > I cannot think of any other options.  I'm short of clues for the best
> > way of doing this, and I'd be happy to give access to the svn repository
> > of people who could help and work on it together.
> I imagine these libraries are fairly small, and therefore IMHO there's no
> real reason to create a separate -pic package for each.  However, you do
> need to provide the library in PIC form if you're going to be linking to it
> from other packages that provide DSOs (i.e., perl and python modules).  I
> would suggest simply bundling a libfoo_pic.a (static, PIC) library in the
> respective -dev package.

Wow!  Thanks, thanks, thanks Steve, this sounds quite ideal.

Now I'll have to figure out the automake/autoconf machinery to have that
working, but at least now I have quite clear what needs to be done.



GPG key: 1024D/797EBFAB 2000-12-05 Enrico Zini <enrico@debian.org>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: