Re: X Strike Force X.Org X11 SVN commit: r578 - branches/6.9/debian
On Sat, 2005-09-03 at 12:42 -0400, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 05:25:49PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 22:57 -0500, X Strike Force SVN Repository Admin
> > wrote:
> > > Log:
> > > * We no longer build or ship xlibs-dev
> >
> > \o/
>
> I thought you'd like that ;-)
My new favourite Debian X maintainer.
> > Can we please do the same to xlibs-static-dev?
> >
> > libXfont and libfontcache don't need to be shipped, neither does
> > libxf86config. The rest should be made shared as well as static.
>
> I discussed something similar for xlibs-static-dev with the release team. I
> was planning on splitting the static libs in to their own packages, but
> keep them as static libs. xlibs-static-dev would hang around for a little
> while longer as a metapackage depending on them. I'm not sure if I'd kill
> that metapackage before etch, since it's got a lot fewer dependencies than
> xlibs-dev.
Hm. It just doesn't seem right to kill xlibs-dev and keep
xlibs-static-dev around.
> Why haven't the current static libs not been made shared in the past? Still
> undergoing changes too fast? I also have no idea how to transition a static
> lib to a shlib, so I'm going to have to do some libtool reading if that's
> going to happen.
Arguably, yes. But, in reality, the API hadn't changed since they were
introduced (Xprint aside, since that doesn't exist in my world). As for
transitioning static to shared -- all the modular libs are shared, and
almost all of them are shared in 6.9.x by default anyway. So you
shouldn't really have to do anything, except maybe nuke #914.
Reply to: