On Thursday 2021-09-09 18:23, Zebediah Figura (she/her) wrote:
[The] assumption has been made even
without considering the whole renaming-dynamic-libraries problem (after all,
what possible users could there even be for MinGW libraries in the first
The downstream uses for mingw libraries are
- the WSL loader for our distro
- other mingw packages (usually more libraries)
- to build other kinds of software that do not
participate in openSUSE anymore (i.e. some application you're
trying to ship to a customer with native Windows)
In that sense, the mingw stack's importance ranks a little below
that of dmd/fpc.
Of course, the other bit is, *maybe* it's
possible to use unmodified dynamic
libraries. There's been ideas proposed and we're still trying to work out the
kinks and figure out if it's actually plausible. In a sense I kind of want to
ask "assuming we can, what do you want, and assuming we can't, what do you
Un-bundling is high on the list, even if the code is only ever used
by one entity. Think of an extreme like chromium, which currently
tries to compile 40000-ish source files from one source tarball. If
one fails, the entire RPM build aborts naturally, and it has to
painstakingly restart from zero after the build recipe was modified
in any way. In short, the metric "source files compiled per .spec"
should not be too large.
(Think back to when Xorg 7.x was being split up into libxcb, libX11,
libXwhatever. Though we now have 20+ more spec files, the turnaround
time is _so_ much better than what it once was.)
Chromium gives me nightmares. Whenever I have to work on that
codebase, it *sucks*.
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!