[arch-general] Fwd: Proposal for the static library problem in Arch

[Dan Liew]

On 28/09/13 19:27, Gaetan Bisson wrote:
> [2013-09-28 15:26:56 +0100] Delcypher:

> I am strongly against this proposal.
> For many reasons, including those in the page Allan pointed to, dynamic
> libraries should be the default on Arch systems, and they should be the
> only supported type of library.

Which page did Allan refer to? I cannot see a reply from Allan in this
thread.

The only link I could find in the other threads was

http://www.plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan9/why_static/

and that wasn't really in favour of shared libraries.

> Users who wish to build and use static libraries are of course free to
> do so, but should not expect Arch will do this work for them. Splitting
> packages as you suggests puts more burden on the developers, build
> process, and mirror bandwidth - with very few users benefiting.
> 
> But, hey, that's fine: there is tons of great stuff in the AUR which is
> not officially supported by Arch Linux, simply because we do not have
> the resources to support everything - so we just focus on what most
> people care. And anybody is free to come along and "unofficially"
> support anything else...

I am disappointed that is the consensus but if the majority of Arch
developers share the view that static libraries should be removed
entirely then there is little I can do to change things.

I'll have to maintain my own boost packages for now.

Thanks,
Dan.