On 05/11/2010 10:03 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> Basically OK, except of the naming proposal (libpic-foo.a etc.).
>
> -1 in its current shape, because this would
> a) break with tradional usage of static libs.
> b) would require intrusive works on some packages' sources.
>
> +1 with the library naming scheme removed.

I don't know how you accomplish shipping both PIC and nonPIC versions of
the same shared lib without renaming the library. I'm open to
alternative suggestions.

~spot
--
packaging mailing list
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging