Le 19 avril 2017 08:09:11 GMT+02:00, Andreas Tille <andr...@an3as.eu> a écrit : >Hi Christian, > >On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 11:07:03PM +0200, Christian Seiler wrote: >> > >> > which is probably due to the fact that I did not changed hmmer2 to >> > create a shared rather than a static library and lhmmer is not >compiled >> > with -fPIC. What might be the less stressful way to solve this? I >> > think the optimal solution would be to craft configure.ac and >> > Makefile.am for hmmer2 (which only ships configure and Makefile.in) >and >> > by doing so create a shared library. However, I do not consider >this >> > as a very fruitful way to spent someones time on orphaned software >so >> > a cheaper solution would be welcome. >> >> Well, you could compile the static library with -fPIC anyway. Linking >> a static library into a shared library is not a problem in and by >> itself (the code will be copied into the shared library just like it >> would be copied into an executable), the only problem here is the >> missing -fPIC. >> >> So if you shoe-horn -fPIC into the compiler flags of the static >> library, linking that into a dynamic library later should work. > >OK, I'll try that. > >> (That said: I'm not a huge fan of this approach, Debian prefers to >> use shared libraries for a reason. OTOH, if I understand you >> correctly your second pacakge is the only reverse dependency, so >> it's not that big of a deal in this case.) > >Psortb[1] was using header files from biosquid[2] and hmmer2[3] but did >not shipped the according library code. No idea how this might have >worked - I assume most users just took the compiled binaries and did >not >noticed. Biosquid and hmmer2 development is discontinued. There is >hmmer 3.x but several users rely on hmmer2. The latter contained >another copy of biosquid which I removed inside the package in >experimental by dynamically linking against biosquid. The biosquid >package in experimental was also overhauled with newly written automake >stuff to enable dynamic libraries which were not available before. > >In other words: The biosquid library is used by two packages (hmmer2 >and >psortb - possibly more code copies around which will be removed later) >but as far as I know hmmer2 was creating the library only to link its >own executables. While I'd prefer a dynamic library for the same >reasons as you specified above the effort to realise this is higher and >the use less than for biosquid (but I would not stop anybody to invest >some time into low popcon orphaned code which is not bad in principle)
Could you please give some string ti identify both library ? Bastien Ith lintian hat > >Kind regards > > Andreas. > >[1] https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debian-med/psortb.git >[2] https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debian-med/biosquid.git >[3] https://anonscm.debian.org/git/debian-med/hmmer2.git -- Envoyé de mon appareil Android avec K-9 Mail. Veuillez excuser ma brièveté.
