Hi Jan,
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2019 22:52:58 +0200 > Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> wrote: > >> We always try to unbundle libraries, because that ensures that all >> packages benefit from security fixes. >> > > Great, so I have to package everything recursively :) > Just to make it clear, because I'm a bit unfamiliar with build systems > and the package API - will packing every library pjproject uses and > just adding it in the "inputs" field make building possible, or will I > have to do magic and copy built packages into "third_party" folder in > the pjproject source tree? This depends very much on how friendly the build system used by pjproject is. Some applications’ build systems resist any attempts to request the application to be linked with existing libraries, whereas others will only fall back to the bundled libraries if the libraries don’t already exist somewhere on LIBRARY_PATH. This is why it’s often a big headache to package software that uses custom build systems, as they often lack sane mechanisms for library discovery or overriding. > Also what if pjproject (or any package I want to update) depends on a > specific version of a library? Should I just update the package, or > should I add a separate version of the library? Let’s discuss this when the need actually arises. We have a few instances of packages that are named “…-for-some-other-package”, but let’s not add them when they aren’t absolutely necessary. -- Ricardo
