Dear Debian Developers, I wonder what is the current state-of-art concerning the code in .a library (archive for static linking). Should it contain PIC code?
Situation: Dynamic (.so) library needs to be linked against such (.a) library. Thank you for any advises and your opinion in advance. On 23/01/2015 17:44, Antonio Diaz Diaz wrote: > Hello Alexander and Dmitry, > > Alexander Alemayhu wrote: >> forwarding a thread I had with Dmitry regarding [#]774164. >> What do you think? > > Libocrad is available only in static form because it is just a very > immature hack. Basically I add functions as users ask for them. It meets > about all the requirements in section 8.3 "Static libraries" of > http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html > > Ocrad itself is very immature. I can't guarantee any stability. > > Moreover, AFAIK, compiling the sources twice (once without PIC for > CLI and another time with PIC for .a) is not trivial. Different names > are needed for the two versions of the object files. > > BTW, libocrad.a is *not* used to create ocrad CLI. libocrad.a is just > ocrad with an incomplete programming interface instead of a CLI. > > > Best regards, > Antonio. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Dmitry Katsubo <dm...@mail.ru> > Date: 2015-01-10 15:39 GMT+01:00 > Subject: Re: Bug#774164: libocrad-dev: libocrad.a contains non-reallocatable > code > To: Alexander Alemayhu <alexander.alema...@googlemail.com> > > On 06/01/2015 22:54, Alexander Alemayhu wrote: >> It might take me some time to make a change, because of work. >> Please also note I have not made Debian libraries before, so it >> might take me some time to do it properly. If you can't wait and >> would like to be the change, please send a patch or pull request >> :) >> >> I had a little chat with my neighbour and he had some useful links >> to share which should give more information on Debian best >> practices. >> >> Thanks. >> >> See below: >> >> https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html >> https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-libraries > > http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html > > Thanks for the links! > > In particular this one: > > http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html#staticonlylibs > > says > > "providing -fPIC versions of static libraries for linking with > shared libraries is a bad sign, because the "unstable interface" is > now exported through another library's stable library interface", > which is true, but without -fPIC the resulting shared library is unusable. > > Ideally of course would be that OCRAD is split into light-weight > command-line and dynamic library library, but I am sure that adds more > organizational work -- would it be worth? Try to ask the OCRAD > community if they would be happy to have OCRAD also as dynamic library > (which can also be wrapped into Perl/Java/etc bridges). > > -- > With best regards, > Dmitry -- With best regards, Dmitry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54df4008.20...@mail.ru
