Why Is libassuan still a static lib?

Hello,

I was curious why libassuan is still distributed as only a
static lib? I
can understand that while gnupg 2 was being developed this
would have
made more sense, because things were still in flux, but I
would imagine
that now the API has stabilized. There is at least one other
program
using libassuan (OpenSC) and from a distribution PoV, it
would be much
better to have this as a shared lib (easier security
updates, less
memory consumption).


_______________________________________________
Gnupg-devel mailing list
Gnupg-develgnupg.org
h
ttp://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 02:55, ericdebian.org said:

> I was curious why libassuan is still distributed as
only a static lib? I

Because we are not yet sure about the API.  As soon as we
are sure of
it we will create a shared library.  As a mainatiner you
should be
glad that we don't need to break the ABI too often.

FWIW, GPGME and Pinentry both come with stipped down and
source copied
versions for libassuan.


Shalom-Salam,

   Werner



_______________________________________________
Gnupg-devel mailing list
Gnupg-develgnupg.org
h
ttp://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel

Werner Koch wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 02:55, ericdebian.org said:
> 
>> I was curious why libassuan is still distributed as
only a static lib? I
> 
> Because we are not yet sure about the API.  As soon as
we are sure of
> it we will create a shared library.  As a mainatiner
you should be
> glad that we don't need to break the ABI too often.

I sort of thought going 1.0 meant you had the API under
control.

> FWIW, GPGME and Pinentry both come with stipped down
and source copied
> versions for libassuan.

Ugh, really? Will they be receptive to fixing that?

_______________________________________________
Gnupg-devel mailing list
Gnupg-develgnupg.org
h
ttp://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel

On Tue, 12 Dec 2006 04:52, ericdebian.org said:

> I sort of thought going 1.0 meant you had the API under
control.

I believe that this is the case.  Others might only start
looking at it
because it is 1.0 now.   As soon as GPGME fully supports
descriptor
passing we will come up with a shared lib.

>> FWIW, GPGME and Pinentry both come with stipped
down and source copied
>> versions for libassuan.
>
> Ugh, really? Will they be receptive to fixing that?

No.  It does not make much sense.  Both use only the client
part and
tehre is no point in adding all the support for servers.  If
is not
much code anyway.


Salam-Shalom,

   Werner



_______________________________________________
Gnupg-devel mailing list
Gnupg-develgnupg.org
h
ttp://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel