[bt-devel] rpm creation

[Martin Gruner]

Hi,

as you know we're short before the packaging of 1.0.
Some ideas on rpm creation:

1. we will not provide binary sword rpms, source rpms are ok but not 
necessary imo

2. all binaries which do not belong to official releases go into the 
"development version" release

3. static linking
These are thoughts which Uwe Koloska posted on sword-devel about a year ago. 
I think we should make the static compiling more automatic. As I have seen in 
the .spec file that Brook posted here, the static compiling is done by 
removing the shared libs from the linker paths (by renaming them). This is 
imo too much work. See below:

<quote>
   there are two possible ways for linking some specific libraries static
   while all the others remain dynamically:

   - present the full path of libLIB.a to the linker (this solution is
     dependent to your personal system and should not be used in public
     makefiles)

   - command the linker explicit to link some libraries static:
         g++ [...] -Wl,-Bstatic -lqt -Wl,-Bdynamic [...]
     `-Wl,OPTION'
     Pass OPTION as an option to the linker.  If OPTION contains
     commas, it is split into multiple options at the commas.
                                                     [from gcc.info]
     This one should be used for public Makefiles.
</quote>

We should consider changing our automake file system to support static 
builds. It should not be too difficult, only the final llinker command should 
need to be modified. That way we can just say
configure --static-build 
and the linker will use the static libs instead of the shared ones, even if 
they are available.

Martin