Re: Should .a library contains non-reallocatable code?

[Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org>]

* Jeff Epler <jepler@unpythonic.net>, 2015-02-19, 17:19:
> Here are two scenarios where building a static library (libfoo) with 
> -fPIC is desirable:
>
> * libbar has a stable API, so it should be shipped as a .so, but if it 
> links libfoo.a, and libfoo.a is not -fPIC, then libbar has to be 
> shipped as a a static library too
>
> * foomodule is a Python wrapper for libfoo, so it must be shipped as a 
> .so, but if it links libfoo.a, and libfoo.a is not -fPIC, it is not 
> possible to build foomodule at all

I'll add:

* User wants to build position-independent executable that links to 
libfoo.a.

> I wonder whether these scenarios were considered when the Policy was 
> written.

IMO the policy is overly strict and it should be relaxed.

--
Jakub Wilk