In data giovedì 28 agosto 2014 13:25:00, Linus Torvalds ha scritto: > On Aug 28, 2014 1:13 PM, "Tim Wootton" <[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.
They do it because from a security point of view, it's easier to recompile a library than to recompile all the packages that depend on it (that is, if it's not a header only library). And they really want to For example the embedded jquery had to be replaced with a soft link and a dependency on the jquery package, but I left the other stuff in because they don't exist in debian yet. In any case, there doesn't seem to be a precise policy on static linking https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=555980 So I guess it would be possible to link statically against libgit2 and then see if the FTP masters get angry or not. > Could someone involved with Debian please try to take this issue up? I'm > fed up with how the kernel makes binary compatibility such a priority, only > to have distributions throw all that sanity and effort away. I can post about the issue on debian-devel but please note that my status in debian is maintainer, not developer, which means that I can't do arbitrary uploads but need a developer to do them for me, unless they add an exception for me, for a given package. Best -- Salvo Tomaselli "Io non mi sento obbligato a credere che lo stesso Dio che ci ha dotato di senso, ragione ed intelletto intendesse che noi ne facessimo a meno." -- Galileo Galilei http://ltworf.github.io/ltworf/ _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.hohndel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
