From https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
== Packaging Static Libraries ==
“Packages including libraries SHOULD exclude static libs as far as possible (eg by configuring with --disable-static). Applications linking against libraries SHOULD link against shared libraries not static versions.”
* I would like to suggest this advice be reconsidered *
The second guideline seems fine; a packaged application (executable) SHOULD link against the shared/dynamic version of a system library.
But this second guideline does not need the first; and I can see little reason for the first.
Since static libraries should end up in their own seperate *-static packages, I see very little advantage in excluding them.
Linkers have always (since the dawn of dynamic linking) preferred shared/dynamic libraries over static versions. The mere presence of a libfoo.a file along side a libfoo.so file will have no effect on executables created.
* Compelling reason for static libraries *
The ability for a developer using a Fedora system to create static executables, or to link one or more libraries statically in an otherwise dynamic executable, is a very useful capability.
There are many advantages to static executables.
Maybe this is all TL;DR so see:
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Gene Hightower