Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 11:45:52 +0100
To: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: RFC on -static subpackages and being more static-linking
 friendly
From: =?UTF-8?Q?S=C3=B6ren?= Tempel <soeren@soeren-tempel.net>
References: <d0c4cab578c513f312390679680eb1cf31690a05.camel@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <d0c4cab578c513f312390679680eb1cf31690a05.camel@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <2QTW7E0OVT3QJ.2JI7073M478ZS@8pit.net>
User-Agent: s-nail v14.9.17-42-g55416880
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

maxice8 <thinkabit.ukim@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello

Hi,

> First, abuild has no automatic dependency tracking like -dev has by
> tracking the 'Requires:' field from pkg-config and handling solinks.
>=20
> This means that every -static subpackage which requires another package
> to link will fail to link.

Yep, I ran into this issue quite a few times myself.

> My proposals are:
>=20
> 1. Remove -static subpackages and move the static library to -dev, if
> backwards compat is a concern we can make `-dev` provides=3D and
> replaces=3D `-static` too.
> 2. Avoid using --disable-static or removing the static library with
> 'rm' and respect the upstream decision to build it by default or not.

Sounds good to me, never really liked the -static split in the first place.=


Cheers,
S=C3=B6ren