On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 12:14:40PM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> I've updated portmidi to the latest upstream version. The > CMakeLists.txt file only creates the shared library. I'd be really > happy if someone could provide a patch / MR to the Salsa repository[1] > to create the static library in addition to provide the same > functionality as the old portmidi devel package had. Just curious: why do you need the old devel package functionality? Are there many reverse dependencies relying on portmidi static library? If the upstream has switched to shared-only, maybe it would be better to transition the rdeps for trixie+1 instead.I try to 1. follow Debian Library Packaging guide[2] (if it might be considered outdated we should probably review this guide
It doesn't mean that the static library must be built. An overwhelming majority of our -dev packages don't contain a static library.
But yeah, it's 19 years old.
2. try to not change to much on a package that is not actually my own
and keep it as close as the original maintainer has designed the package
Catch-22.I guess that's one of the problems with updating someone else's packages to an upstream version that is 9 years newer.
-- WBR, wRAR
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature