On 2/22/22 19:47, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Denis Fateyev wrote:
>> The "ustl" upstream, for which I maintain the RPM package, has recently
>> switched from providing a shared library to a static library.
>
> Generally, you do not want to follow such a change, but force the build
> system
On 23/02/2022 02:05, Denis Fateyev wrote:
Unfortunately, the shared library support is explicitly removed by the
upstream:
You can revert this commit with a downstream patch.
I believe it's not worth to work around this behavior additionally.
From README:
> This library is obsolete.
On 22/02/2022 19:57, Denis Fateyev wrote:
So I'm going to make changes in the package, and provide everything in
"-devel" subpackage.
No. You must patch the build manifest and force building as a shared
library, regardless of the upstream choice.
Denis Fateyev wrote:
> Unfortunately, the shared library support is explicitly removed by the
> upstream:
> https://github.com/msharov/ustl/issues/100#issuecomment-1040553883
>
https://github.com/msharov/ustl/commit/7366ab143d9bd0f48c59931c0c58529eb5179c27
This is just lame. I do not understand
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 6:47 AM Kevin Kofler via devel <
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Denis Fateyev wrote:
> > The "ustl" upstream, for which I maintain the RPM package, has recently
> > switched from providing a shared library to a static library.
>
> Generally, you do not want to
Denis Fateyev wrote:
> The "ustl" upstream, for which I maintain the RPM package, has recently
> switched from providing a shared library to a static library.
Generally, you do not want to follow such a change, but force the build
system to build a shared library instead, even if it is not the
Hello all,
The "ustl" upstream, for which I maintain the RPM package, has recently
switched from providing a shared library to a static library.
So I'm going to make changes in the package, and provide everything in
"-devel" subpackage.
I have looked through
