Queries regarding packaging of static libraries

[Ankur Sinha]

Hello,

I'm working on packaging required software to add to the fedora medical
initiative. 

Of late, I've come across quite a few *tiny* libraries which are build
deps for the software. The issue with most of these are that they only
provide static libraries. These are generally libraries used by
universities in research. 

I've already submitted two of them for review:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714326
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714327

and now, I've come across two more:

http://www.cise.ufl.edu/research/sparse/UFconfig/UFconfig-3.6.1.tar.gz
http://www.cise.ufl.edu/research/sparse/amd/AMD-2.2.2.tar.gz

All the software that require these maintain a bundled version. I wanted
to know if I need to package these, (without any shared libs), or should
I just let the bundled versions remain as internal libraries? 

Someone at #fedora-devel suggested I patch the Makefiles to generate the
shared objects. I'm not sure if it's okay to provide shared objects
while upstream only provides static libs. This will also increase the
work required in packaging since all the Makefiles will need to be
heavily patched.  

I'd like to know what the correct and efficient way to proceed here is. 

Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur