Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Reporting_Bug_Guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#41971 - [libutil-linux] please add options=(staticlibs)

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Steven Honeyman (stevenhoneyman) - Sunday, 14 September 2014, 15:34 GMT
Last edited by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Tuesday, 16 September 2014, 11:56 GMT
Task Type Feature Request
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Tom Gundersen (tomegun)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

Description:

Currently I see that the PKGBUILD is expecting some static libraries (and so it should, because they're inlcuded as default):

cd "$srcdir"/_libutil-linux
mv "$pkgdir"/usr/lib/lib*.{a,so}* usr/lib

...but the .a files never made it into the package in the Arch repo.


Additional info:

FYI - the reason I wanted static libraries is many programs use libblkid+libuuid, and today I wanted one of them without any deps!
This task depends upon

Closed by  Dave Reisner (falconindy)
Tuesday, 16 September 2014, 11:56 GMT
Reason for closing:  Won't implement
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Sunday, 14 September 2014, 15:40 GMT
> FYI - the reason I wanted static libraries is many programs use libblkid+libuuid, and today I wanted one of them without any deps!
Could you be a little more specific?
Comment by Steven Honeyman (stevenhoneyman) - Sunday, 14 September 2014, 15:45 GMT
Sure; I've been putting together a compact initramfs image, and using eudev. Whilst eudev can work fine without lib{blkid,uuid} - I'd rather it supported them. Knowing eudev was going to be the only bit of software that needed (parts of) those libraries on my new image... it made much more sense to link static libraries; which cut quite a bit of unused code from the end result.
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Sunday, 14 September 2014, 17:00 GMT
Why eudev? Why a compact initramfs? For what gain?

It's risky enough running a different versions of systemd-udevd in your initramfs and root. I imagine there's even more gotchas between a fork of udev and systemd-udevd.
Comment by Steven Honeyman (stevenhoneyman) - Sunday, 14 September 2014, 17:07 GMT
I think we're steering off topic here - I've already compiled my stuff, it's working fine; job done.

I submitted this feature request because:
1) It looks like an oversight in the pkgbuild, given that you try to copy lib*.a as well as .so* to the new directory
2) Tiny amount more disk space would be used, but other than that, no overheads, no risk, no implementation time; no reason not to!

Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Sunday, 14 September 2014, 17:15 GMT
There's no oversight -- static libs we intentionally removed from packages unless there's some compelling reason to keep them:

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

So, if you'll allow me to ask you the basic questions as to wtf it is you're doing, we can decide if there's a compelling use case that would be generally applicable.
Comment by Doug Newgard (Scimmia) - Tuesday, 16 September 2014, 01:23 GMT
Pretty much the same request as  FS#41938 . I would suggest this one be closed as well.

If you want static libs, build them. Simple as that.

Loading...