On 05/03/2019 07:07, Marcel Hollerbach wrote:
On 3/4/19 9:13 PM, Ross Vandegrift wrote:
- no static libs are generated. Is that intentional.
Which static libs are you refering to ? Most static libs that we have
are only used in 1 place, and are added via a dependency and source
code, i don't really have a strong reason why I did it like this, if
this is a issue, it can be changed quickly :)
With autotools, --enable-static would output static libs along with the
shared objects for all of EFL. Debian packages often ship static libs
in the -dev packages, EFL included. If static EFL libs should be
deprecated that's probably okay - I don't know that anyone is using the
static libs we ship.
Has anyone a comment on this? How should we handle this ?
I think dropping support is reasonable, most distro's don't ship them
and the only reason you'd use them is if you want to build your app
against static efl to make it easier to ship outside of standard package
management. But the proprietary users who may consider doing this quite
probably wouldn't due to efl's licensing. So documenting it in the
release notes is probably the only action required
--
Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net
Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek
SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30
GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
