Frank Bergmann fedora-devel at
Wed May 8 11:02:55 UTC 2013


I freshly subscribed this list after reading that dietlibc seems to be

What's the current status of dietlibc in Fedora and how can it be checked?
Last built was done by Jon Ciesla on 2013-03-27.

On Sun Mar 3 03:21:06 UTC 2013, Kevin Kofler wrote:

> We agree then. But if we want to keep dietlibc, it needs to be fixed to 
> comply with the packaging guidelines and best practices, i.e.:
> * Shared library build needs to be enabled. I see no reason to build this 
> library as static only as Enrico is doing. We tolerate this where upstream 
> does not support shared builds at all, but this is not the case here.
> * The main package should contain the shared library (and the documentation 
> that's relevant at runtime, in particular COPYING) only. Right now it 
> contains some stuff which probably belongs into -devel.
> * The main package must not require -devel as it does now.
> * The -devel package should not contain the static library, which should 
> instead be in a -static subpackage.
> * The -lib package (which is currently not built by default, it contains the 
> shared library if you enable shared build) should simply be the main 
> package. It doesn't make sense to have a -lib subpackage of a library.
> * The -header subpackage should really be called -headers (There's more than 
> one header! And it'd also be consistent with glibc.) or folded into -devel 
> (though then it can't be noarch anymore).

If you are actually looking for a maintainer and the policies/rules are
not too difficult then I would do this job (before you throw dietlibc out
of Fedora). :-)

best regards

More information about the devel mailing list