Re: Stop shipping static libraries for NetBSD

[James Chacon <jmc%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Aug 19, 2008, at 4:37 PM, Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc. wrote:

> On 19-Aug-08, at 4:55 PM, Alan Barrett wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 18 Aug 2008, Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc. wrote:
> > > To me it is just as sad that NetBSD, in its role as as a binary-only
> > > vendor, would like to take the same attitude that Sun and Apple and
> > > Microsoft have done and also force everyone providing source-based
> > > software to those using those binary-only distributions to be  
> > > totally
> > > locked into the "everything must be dynamic all the time" mindset.
> >
> > Please distinguish between what Jason wants and what NetBSD wants.
> > Also, I don't think even Jason wants what you describe above.
>
> Yes, I agree Jason's proposal isn't NetBSD policy yet.
>
> I'm not sure what Jason really wants, beyond beyond the simplest  
> form of his proposal to stop shipping static libraries in the binary  
> distributions.  I suspect there's more to it than just that though,  
> and that's part of what I'm worried about.
>
>
> > By the way, I am opposed to the idea of no longer shipping static
> > libraries by default, which is what I think Jason was proposing.  I  
> > am
> > also opposed to the idea of no longer having the ability to build  
> > static
> > libraries, which is what I think that you thought Jason was  
> > proposing.
>
>
> Yes, I think I'm clear on what it means to not ship static libraries  
> but still have the ability to build them. In fact that's what I was  
> talking about.  Users of a binary NetBSD distribution that does not  
> include static libraries would be forced to build dynamic-only  
> applications whenever they compile something from source, be it  
> their own creation, other NetBSD-related source, or some third party  
> source.

Really? Such users you indicate are fully capable of getting any  
source they want and compiling it *except* NetBSD source? That's an  
interesting assumption. One would assume if this is so critical to any  
given user that cares, they can also compile up the static library  
they need from NetBSD source as well.

i.e. nothing prevents leaving easy to run targets which say "give me  
static libs". I think all Jason was suggesting was eliminating  
burdening down a distribution with something that is only of use to a  
very small minority of end users who are themselves quite capable of  
compiling anything they want anyways....

James

> I haven't said so clearly yet, and perhaps this is what is coming  
> out of what I have said so far, but I am indeed worried that not  
> providing static libraries in the default binary distribution would  
> be pushing NetBSD well over the edge of a slippery slope that I for  
> one do not ever want to slide down.
>
> I am quite pleased to see that you and so many other NetBSD  
> developers and users are opposed to this proposal.
>
> --
>                                         Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc.
>                                         <woods%planix.ca@localhost>