Re: Packaging of static libraries
On 10/04/2016 23:08, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 02:28:02PM +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
>>
>> 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.
> That's the funny part. Some use cases require non-PIC static libraries,
> and others require PIC static libraries. Should we then ship both? I
> think we can all agree that would be terrible. So why prioritize one
> over the other?
What uses require PIC static libraries that cannot be satisfied by building
-static --whole-archive ?
> Mike
Alastair
--
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: