[arch-general] static libraries in packages

[Doug Newgard]

On 2014-05-14 06:51, Christian Hesse wrote:
> Antonio Rojas <nqn1976list at gmail.com> on Wed, 2014/05/14 11:51:
>> Christian Hesse wrote:
>> 
>> > I think gcc, glibc, llvm and friends are ok. But zlib, mupdf,
>> > mysql/mariadb and some others should go away.
>> 
>>  There was a to-do list to cleanup all static libs, so all remaining 
>> ones
>> are there for a reason. Check the changelogs for the specific reasons 
>> for
>> each package, e.g.
>> 
>> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/packages.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/zlib&id=83d05088a1cb1b56561b9ebe365d18d033752c72
> 
> Is it possible to fix binutils testsuite?
> 
> Remember the security flaws in zlib? Does anybody know what package has 
> been
> built against static zlib?
> 
>> https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit/community.git/commit/trunk?h=packages/mupdf&id=c34f53eeb8efd6b4b033c2fdc58d0a329efdeeef
> 
> This brings the static libraries back, but there is no reason.
> 
> libmariadbclient ships with static libraries because a package from AUR
> (neko) requires it. I think anybody should fix neko, but shipping 
> official
> packages with static libraries in this situation is just stupid.
> 
> Removing static libraries (and keeping them away!) should be treated 
> more
> strict.

That's completely up to the maintainer. If they decide to ship static 
libs for any reason, that's their choice to make. There are very few 
"strict" rules.