Arch Linux

confirmed. The libboost_*.a are gone.

Are they needed for something? We are starting to remove static libraries from packages if they are not needed.

I'm statically linking with boost, so I need them as a user (which is why I have the boost package anyway - for development).

Exactly what Dror Levin said. We need them for development.

Since these are development-only files, they should get included in boost, not in boost-libs.

I agree, the static files should be included again, since they facilitate development and external deployment.

If packages are actively striped from static libs, maybe they could be repackaged in a separate static-lib package, for those who need it.

Versions 1.53.0-{1,2} don't include static libs as well.
Can you please add them back to either boost or boost-libs, or alternatively to a new package?
Either way is fine by me, just as long as I can get them through pacman instead of compiling my own boost.

This is really holding me back :(

I reported duplicate bug ( FS#34785 ) - so I join in the request. I would also like the static libs back, please.

So far everybody agrees these should go into the boost package again. Closing without a response is not the way to fix this bug.

So far everybody agrees these should go into the boost package again. Closing without a response is not the way to fix this bug.

Until this can be addressed I created an AUR package https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/boost-libs-static/

Mikhail, I have just noticed it yesterday, and perhaps this is the way we should be addressing it. Looking at the package now. In the meanwhile, I've been building a custom one from ABS and locking it with pacman, which means it has to be updated manually after every sysupgrade.

I agree, I also need them for development, archlinux it's the only distribution that I've found good for using as a C/C++ developer, because almost all libraries comes with developments files already (headers, shared and static libraries). It's a shame that since a few months someone started to remove static libraries from many packages, what kind of new police is that? Now I'm having hard times recompiling many packages because I need the static libraries for development. I need the static libraries to compile universal linux binaries for my projects, because although I use archlinux I have to distribute my compiled binaries for other linux systems. I am sure that I am not the only developer that needs that.

> It's a shame that since a few months someone started to remove static libraries from many packages, what kind of new police is that?

https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2013-March/024552.html

I also need the static libraries for making certain kind of compiles. Please add static boost libs back.

I have a proposal for creating a separate package for static libraries to try to keep everyone happy. Static libraries are not installed by default and are not a boost dependency (saving disk space) but the user can specify to install if they really want the static libraries.

boost : Development files
boost-libs : Shared libraries only
boost-static-libs : Static libraries only

A patch is attached that applies against the PKGBUILD for boost-1.54.0-3

I've tried to post my proposal to the following arch mailing lists arch-dev-public (apparently I can't because it's read-only) and arch-general (it's moderated and my post has not been accepted yet).

I'm hoping that the Arch Devs will take on the idea because it's easy to implement and solves both problems (Wanting to save space Vs. needing static libraries for development).

I have a proposal for creating a separate package for static libraries to try to keep everyone happy. Static libraries are not installed by default and are not a boost dependency (saving disk space) but the user can specify to install if they really want the static libraries.

boost : Development files
boost-libs : Shared libraries only
boost-static-libs : Static libraries only

A patch is attached that applies against the PKGBUILD for boost-1.54.0-3

I've tried to post my proposal to the following arch mailing lists arch-dev-public (apparently I can't because it's read-only) and arch-general (it's moderated and my post has not been accepted yet).

I'm hoping that the Arch Devs will take on the idea because it's easy to implement and solves both problems (Wanting to save space Vs. needing static libraries for development).

@delcypher: sounds a lot like Debian. Fine by me. I used to like Arch for including all -dev by default, though.

@Noel : I'm afraid my proposal was rejected :(
See https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2013-September/034222.html

I'm afraid the only way this is going to change is if enough people complain.

I guess it's AUR for now.

i'll include static libs in the next rebuild, into boost package.

@Ionut Biru Thanks.


Although it is unlikely my proposal for a boost-static-libs package will ever be used there were some mistakes in my original patch (static libraries were installed in the wrong location) so here is a patch that actually works.

There's no need for a standalone static-libs package, as boost is already split up between runtime libs and a huge development files package. The static libs will get packaged in the boost package. Users who don't develop/package will never install that package on their system anyways.

@Ionut Biru

Please don't. Static libraries are not required to execute anything else, are not needed for 99.99% of the developers and take up disk space unnecessarily.

Isn't AUR exactly there for such package customization ?