packages: cairo/cairo-link.patch, cairo/cairo.spec - 1.10.0 - merged from d...

[Jakub Bogusz]

On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 12:00:50PM +0200, Patryk Zawadzki wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Jakub Bogusz <qboosh at pld-linux.org> wrote:
> > So finally - what is the future policy?
> > Randomly removing some files or moving to -static makes only mess,
> > which is worse than current situation.
> 
> Did anyone check what is the policy for other distros?

Fedora - no .la, no static.
Debian - still discussing(?)
Arch - "libtool slaying" but I don't know anything about static

> > We have some options:
> >
> > - preserve status quo, keeping *.la in -devel
> 
> It results in trash being passed to linker and sometimes hides missing deps.
> 

> > - remove *.la only for libraries with proper pkgconfig support, keep the
> >  rest in -devel
> 
> That's just a partial workaround.

Well, pkgconfig support for dependency tracking (better than libtool's,
in fact) was the most important argument for removing .la (except for
dropping static linking support at all).

> > - remove all library *.la and -static packages
> 
> I'd like to drop -static from all the desktop packages. We only build
> it for the sake of having it.

What is the definition of "desktop package"?


-- 
Jakub Bogusz    http://qboosh.pl/