Summary: | virtual/libusb should support USE=static-libs | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Kalin KOZHUHAROV <kalin> |
Component: | Current packages | Assignee: | Gentoo's Team for Core System packages <base-system> |
Status: | CONFIRMED --- | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | kalin, mgorny, peter, proxy-maint |
Priority: | Normal | Keywords: | PullRequest |
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
See Also: | https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/10612 | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | |||
Bug Blocks: | 695878 |
Description
Kalin KOZHUHAROV
2018-12-11 10:40:32 UTC
Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> might be interested in this... We don't encourage static-libs and you don't seem to have a very good case for needing them. (In reply to Michał Górny from comment #2) > We don't encourage static-libs and you don't seem to have a very good case > for needing them. Ookey, that is a new view for me, but thank you for clarifying it. I understand the reasoning against static linking for normal packages that are meant to be used (present, built, updated) on the system; Here the case is using a Gentoo box as a development platform for other hardware (e.g. embedded). Sorry for not making it clear. Just for the record, the sole reason for static-libs here in this bug is having an easily transferable tool (flashrom) to various, less-powerful and limited hardware platforms, to work on a low-level (flash firmware). While the proposed solution in PR is the generic one, of course it may be tackled at sys-apps/flashrom ebuild level (by not depending on virtual/libusb, but directly on dev-libs/libusb and dev-libs/libusb-compat with proper USE). But I thought it will be kind of a hack and decided to fix the general case, since dev-libs/libusb and dev-libs/libusb-compat do support static-libs already. Are those comments grounds of reopening of this bug? If not - close it and I'll submit the other proposed solution on flashrom ebuild directly. (In reply to Kalin KOZHUHAROV from comment #3) > (In reply to Michał Górny from comment #2) > > We don't encourage static-libs Gentoo is about enabling choice. > > and you don't seem to have a very good case for needing them. > > Here the case is using a Gentoo box as a development platform for > other hardware (e.g. embedded). I think this use case is very much valid. > Sorry for not making it clear. No need to apologize. > Just for the record, the sole reason for static-libs here in this bug is > having an easily transferable tool (flashrom) to various, less-powerful > and limited hardware platforms, to work on a low-level (flash firmware). It's perfectly reasonable to add IUSE=static-libs to the virtual. The library being LGPL means that static linking is explicitly allowed by the license, and there's no reason for Gentoo to add obstacles on that path. > While the proposed solution in PR is the generic one, of course it may be > tackled at sys-apps/flashrom ebuild level (by not depending on > virtual/libusb, but directly on dev-libs/libusb and dev-libs/libusb-compat > with proper USE). But I thought it will be kind of a hack and decided to fix > the general case, since dev-libs/libusb and dev-libs/libusb-compat do > support static-libs already. I agree. I think your proposed commit is an improvement over the status quo. I hope it gets committed quickly, and that we don't have to do the workaround in the flashrom ebuild. (I am proxy maint.) Thanks! We will take another look at this. |