Re: gentoo: static/dynamic linking libraries

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 10:54:12 +0200
> "Jakub Moc" <jakub.mocgmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/29/07, Roman Zimmermann <mereandorgmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm now using gentoo with
EXTRA_ECONF="--disable-static" for a
>>> while and it seems quite stable. Sometimes I
encounter a package
>>> that won't build with this setting, but that's
a rare occasion. At
>>> the moment this packages are for me:
>>> dev-libs/libpcre
>> Disabling static libs in libpcre makes
sys-apps/grep w/ USE=pcre bomb
>> out on compile... Just an example why you should
always install both
>> of them.
> 
> No, that's an example of why you should sometimes
install both.
> 

Open Question part:

Since I don't have any thing other than Gentoo : does anyone
know how
other distros handle static libs in their -dev packages?
Does anyone
care about static libs except for maybe really really low
level stuff?

My Opinion part:

I'd definitely would like to see them leave my system for
good as I have
no use for 99% of them whatsoever.

Open Question part:

Could some FEATURE disable static libs building by default
in desktop
profiles, with some (like the 5 packages Roman pointed out)
using
something like a RESTRICT?

(These questions are really not meant to be inflammatory and
they are
honest questions as I'm learning the trade here. Yet, if I'm
way off,
please let me know  )

Cheers,

Rémi
--
gentoo-devgentoo.org mailing list

Rémi Cardona wrote:
> Since I don't have any thing other than Gentoo : does
anyone know how
> other distros handle static libs in their -dev
packages? Does anyone
> care about static libs except for maybe really really
low level stuff?

Anyone who wants to build a static binary wants the static
libs. Given
the difficulty in universally enabling or disabling their
builds because
of build-system differences, building them and tossing them
in the trash
with INSTALL_MASK, as Marius suggested, seems like the best
way to go.

Thanks,
Donnie