[arch-dev-public] Making !staticlibs the default in makepkg.conf

Eric Bélanger snowmaniscool at gmail.com
Tue Oct 15 23:18:00 EDT 2013

On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux.org> wrote:

> On 29/09/13 17:36, Allan McRae wrote:
> > All this recent talk about static libs reminded me that we added
> > options=(!staticlibs) to makepkg-4.1 to automatically remove them, with
> > the idea of enabling it by default.
> >
> > My plan is:
> >  - build pacman with updated makepkg.conf
> >  - update devtools to have this in the makepkg.conf
> >  - set up a rebuild list
> >
> > The rebuild is to allow people that really need static libraries
> > (toolchain etc) to add options=(staticlibs) to their PKGBUILD, although
> > it will also get other static libraries gone.
> >
> > Any obejctions (from devs and TUs)?
> Due to support confirmed through lack of objection, I have uploaded a
> pacman package with !staticlibs in makepkg.conf to [testing].
> @Pierre: I have also submitted a patch for devtools to add this to our
> build environment.  Can you make a release with that?
> Once devtools is updated, I will generate a rebuild list.  If your
> package really needs static libs, you will need to add
> options=(staticlibs) to the PKGBUILD.  The packages I know that need it
> are glibc, gcc, binutils, haskell, probably lua (but we hack that for
> shared libraries...).  So if you are not dealing with a compiler, you
> probably do not need them...
> Allan
I just discussed on IRC with Allan about the possibility of making !libtool
the default in makepkg.conf. Currently, 104 packages contains *.la files
(mostly gambas stuff). We could check which of these packages really
require the libtool files and add an options=('libtool') to them. This
could be done at the same time as the !staticlibs rebuild.  Any objections?


More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list