Peter Samuelson <pe...@p12n.org> writes: > As far as I know, there are 3 ways to handle static linking: > 1) Document somehow what a real link line will look like, or let people > figure it out on their own; > 2) libtool; > 3) pkg-config.
> So, my upstream does not ship .pc files. I've thought about creating > my own .pc files and trying to push them upstream, but haven't got > around to it yet. Therefore, if I empty dependency_libs, anyone > wanting static linking of my library will have to know, a priori, what > its dependent libraries are. Is this OK, or should I wait until I have > time to produce .pc files? It depends somewhat on the library, but for the average library these days, I suspect no one is bothering with static linking. There are a few special exceptions, but it's been quite some time since anyone's asked me about static linking for any of the libraries I maintain as upstream. I know of upstreams that have dropped static linking entirely, including MIT Kerberos. That wasn't a completely uncontroversial decision, and they may introduce it down the road, but the number of people objecting wasn't that high and I believe it was entirely people using non-Linux systems. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
