Here are two scenarios where building a static library (libfoo) with -fPIC is desirable:
* libbar has a stable API, so it should be shipped as a .so, but if it links libfoo.a, and libfoo.a is not -fPIC, then libbar has to be shipped as a a static library too * foomodule is a Python wrapper for libfoo, so it must be shipped as a .so, but if it links libfoo.a, and libfoo.a is not -fPIC, it is not possible to build foomodule at all (The same goes for wrapping the library for most other interpreted languages) (At $DAY_JOB this bit me in the last week [not pertaining to Debian-packaged software] so it's a sore spot at the moment) Unless the circumstances of libfoo make these scenarios unlikely, it seems like it is better for other packages to prefer -fPIC even when building a static library. I wonder whether these scenarios were considered when the Policy was written. Jeff -- 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/20150219231930.gb37...@unpythonic.net