On 28/08/14 21:25, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Aug 28, 2014 1:13 PM, "Tim Wootton" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> On 28/08/14 20:29, Robert C. H.
>>
>>
>> I have some vague memory that this is because the libgit2 version
that we require is in experimental.
>>
> Indeed, and it looks like it's likely to stay there.
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=745960
.. And this is just one reason why distributions should not do the whole
insane "dynamic linking only" strategy.
I just found this in the Debian policy document:
"8.3 Static libraries
...
In some cases, it is acceptable for a library to be available in static
form only; these cases include:
* libraries for languages whose shared library support is immature or
unstable
* libraries whose interfaces are in flux or under development
(commonly the case when the library's major version number is zero, or
where the ABI breaks across patchlevels)
* libraries which are explicitly intended to be available only in
static form by their upstream author(s)"
I think bullet 2 covers the libgit2 maintainer's argument in the bug, so
maybe this is enough to allow us to static link while we wait for the
dynamic library to stabilise enough to be allowed through.
cheers,
Tim
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.hohndel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
