Received: from vps5.brixit.nl (vps5.brixit.nl [192.81.221.234])
	by nld3-dev1.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C72478107B
	for <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 21:42:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [23.129.64.202])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by vps5.brixit.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9613C605F6
	for <~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Sun, 17 Jan 2021 21:42:07 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: RFC on -static subpackages and being more static-linking friendly
To: ~alpine/devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
References: <d0c4cab578c513f312390679680eb1cf31690a05.camel@gmail.com>
From: Oliver Smith <ollieparanoid@postmarketos.org>
Message-ID: <b00e2610-bf25-463a-db2b-e9b2fb9db4f2@postmarketos.org>
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2021 22:42:01 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d0c4cab578c513f312390679680eb1cf31690a05.camel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Leo,

maxice8:
> My proposals are:
> 
> 1. Remove -static subpackages and move the static library to -dev, if
> backwards compat is a concern we can make `-dev` provides= and
> replaces= `-static` too.

just to be sure, you are only talking about removing -static subpackages 
for libraries, right?

I want to be sure whether apk-tools-static stays around, as we're using 
this with pmbootstrap (and I'm sure that there are lots of other scripts 
using it to bootstrap alpine systems).

Best,
Oliver