https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2449216
--- Comment #31 from Fabio Valentini <[email protected]> --- > Hmmm. Well, if you only build the static version then you can avoid the > problem and use GNU ld (build.rs handles this already), but I'm guessing the > Fedora packaging guidelines disallow that? There's a strong preference for shared libraries, but static objects are not entirely forbidden: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries Maybe somebody more familiar with the Rust toolchain in Fedora can help us out here? The package built as-is from the latest spec file doesn't seem to have versioned symbols, and going by the aforementioned backwards-incompatible changes that will happen at some point (without bumping the soname?), it sounds like that would just break then. There's only one minor thing in the latest version (the License tag is #FIXME again - just copy-paste the previous comments and value again, it was correct before the last regen with rust2rpm). Other than those two things, I think the package looks good now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2449216 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202449216%23c31 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
