Le 07/10/2011 01:44, Michael Scherer a écrit :
So far, the 2 arguments ( or at least, those that I understood ) are :
- there is others problem, so why should we fix this one ?
Which is just a bad reason.
- that's intrusive, that translate to "we have to maintain it and that
take ressources", and I would say that maintainance would maybe less a
issue if we pushed the change to upstream ( or at least correctly
explain our problem with bundling library, and given similar policies
exist for Fedora and Debian
( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries ), that
should not be a too orthodox point of view . But yes, maintainance is a
issue.
You're missing the point: this is not 'statically linking against a
private version of a library instead of dynamically linking the system
one', but 'statically linking against a private version of a library
instead of statically linking againt the system one', which makes the
comparaison cases slightly biased.
--
Guillaume
