On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 5:05 AM Dan Cermak <dcermak@suse.com> wrote:
Hi list,
Dan Cermak <DCermak@suse.com> writes:
Hi list,
I would like to propose a change in our packaging guidelines, specifically the part about bundling static libraries in a *-devel-static subpackage (see: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines#Exception).
How about we follow what Fedora does and instead of putting the static lib in a subpackages, we put it in the "main" package instead and add a:
I have formulated this part wrongly and not as I actually intended it: the bundled static library shouldn't necessarily be put into the main package, but into the respective subpackage where it belongs (and if that means its own subpackage, then so be it).
For example: a shared library bundles a static library and the static library is needed to link against the shared lib.
The main package is libfoo, which ships the shared library. The foo-devel subpackage ships all the headers, the static library and Provides: bundled(evil-static-lib)
Thereby only those that need the static lib actually get it, we can search for the bundled library and we have a package less.
I admit that technically it *is* now a little easier to link against the static lib, but then again you should BuildRequires: bundled(evil-static-lib) which I find actually more conspicuous than a BuildRequires: libevil-static
Fedora does require static libraries to be in their own -static subpackages, generally: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_packaging_static... The bundled() Provides is for vendored code, which is different: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org