On Monday 15 June 2009 01:09:51 Reinhard Tartler wrote: > Andres Mejia <mcita...@gmail.com> writes: > >> [1] good reasons include massive performance gains, extra features, etc. > > > > It's merely for convenience to users. > > > > Who's "we" by the way? I see various static libraries on my system alone, > > including static libs for libc, zlib, libbz2, and freealut, so I'm > > guessing "we" is not Debian. > > Well, I'm perhaps overexaggerating here. > > For libc, zlib and libbz2 I do see uses cases, and I'm fairly sure that > there are some other packages that link statically. At least for these > libraries, I can see why users really expect to have the static > libraries around. > > does this apply as well to alut, openal and alure as well? If yes, then > shipping alure.a is no problem. if not, I'd recommend to spare the > headaches here.
What headaches? Forgive my lack of imagination here. Right now I don't see a reason why static libraries should be removed. -- Regards, Andres -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
