From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61D8C138334 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:51:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 12BCFE0A01; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:51:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (dev.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 929B2E09A2 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:51:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from whubbs1.gaikai.biz (unknown [100.42.103.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: williamh) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DE4134C892 for ; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:51:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (nullmailer pid 9094 invoked by uid 1000); Mon, 04 Nov 2019 21:51:20 -0000 Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 15:51:20 -0600 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Do (old-ish) Portage QA checks comprise policy? Message-ID: <20191104215120.GA8806@whubbs1.dev.av1.gaikai.org> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <33564bf19f26e1f99d9efca5d1c15c079c01e3d9.camel@gentoo.org> <0ec1a891bcba8e1ca780d585c2134d0b7e4100ea.camel@gentoo.org> <72cb9df3-8e05-c192-3b3e-3e2977e1a9ee@gentoo.org> <20191104192643.GA8436@whubbs1.dev.av1.gaikai.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Archives-Salt: 1e625a10-9be3-46c9-a806-9a6746ccc200 X-Archives-Hash: 716604578c577b24aebcdaeba16f34e0 --3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 02:05:19PM -0600, Michael Jones wrote: > On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 1:26 PM William Hubbs wrote: >=20 > > That way is not building static libraries at all. If we go that way as > > a distro the support for forcing static libraries into /usr/lib* is not > > needed because we would just not allow static libraries. > > >=20 > As an end user, I would be unhappy if static libraries were no longer > supported at all. I use them regularly for my development work. OpenRC as an example has never supported being built statically along with pam which is turned on in Gentoo, so it would be safe for openrc to not build them. Let's move the discussion of static libs to a separate thread however and continue it there. William --3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQTVeuxEZo4uUHOkQAluVBb0MMRlOAUCXcCdUwAKCRBuVBb0MMRl ONnXAKCbd0nIAzPXKAUDivZSluo269N02wCgi2FAqRjqFbhWolUKcJWIxEPgm+k= =etH/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --3MwIy2ne0vdjdPXF--