On 12/30/20 3:48 PM, Ian McInerney wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 7:54 PM Ben Cotton <bcotton@redhat.com
> <mailto:bcotton@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
>     https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LTOBuildImprovements
>     <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LTOBuildImprovements>
>
>
>     == Summary ==
>     Currently all packages that are not opted out of LTO include
>     -ffat-lto-objects in their build flags.  This proposal would remove
>     -ffat-lto-objects from the default LTO flags and only use it for
>     packages that actually need it.
>
>     == Owner ==
>     * Name: [[User:law | Jeff Law]]
>     * Email: law@redhat.com <mailto:law@redhat.com>
>
>
>     == Detailed Description ==
>     -ffat-lto-objects was added to the default LTO flags to ensure that
>     any installed .o/.a files included actual compiled code rather than
>     just LTO bytecodes (which are stripped after the install phase).
>     However, that is wasteful from a compile-time standpoint as few
>     packages actually install any .o/.a files.
>
>     This proposal would remove -ffat-lto-objects from the default LTO
>     flags and packages that actually need the option would have to opt-in
>     via an RPM macro in their .spec file.  This should significantly
>     improve build times for most packages in Fedora.
>
>
> Does this mean that packages that are explicitly shipping a static
> library to the end user need to enable this macro to allow the
> installed static library to be usable by an end-user's compiler? If
> this is the case, then the packaging guidelines should be updated to
> reflect this.
Yes and the change request reflects that an update to the packaging
guidelines is necessary.