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

Re: Packaging of static libraries

On 10/04/2016 08:05, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi,
>   > The only use case I could imagine is to create an executable that can
>   > run outside of Debian.
Static builds are still common in (parts of) scientific computing.
Two main reasons:

(1) When performance matters. Here we need the static library to be
built without
position independent code. This can still give several percent gains
on arch / programming language.
Hence the library needs to be built differently than for shared libs. I
typically use
separate debian/build-{shared,static} directories or the cmake equivalent.

(2) Long-lived executables. e.g. for time series in Earth obs, climate
work, where you want
to guarantee reproducibility / biases of an executable built two years ago.
Often in such science its more important to know and track bugs/biases
than to repair.

>   That's a valid use case for consumer of the lib*-dev package.
> remained unanswered but it seems there might be some need what "usually
> provided in addition" might mean and whether it is advisable to try hard
> to provide static libraries even if upstream build system does not
> easily provide both.
> Kind regards
>       Andreas.
> [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2016/04/msg00183.html
> [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#s-sharedlibs-static
Kind regards

Alastair McKinstry, <alastair@sceal.ie>, <mckinstry@debian.org>, https://diaspora.sceal.ie/u/amckinstry
Misentropy: doubting that the Universe is becoming more disordered. 

Reply to: