[ was Re: static libraries ]

Ken Moffat ken at
Thu Apr 16 12:13:55 PDT 2009

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 11:01:53PM +0000, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 09:39:51PM +0000, Martin Ward wrote:
> > Is this what you were looking for Ken?
> > 
> >
> > 
> > regards
> > Martin
>  Hmm, it very much looks like it.  I'll try it in my next build, if
> it still applies.
>  Thanks.
 Unfortunately, I halted that build before kde and it hasn't seemed
urgent enough to get back to.  Meanwhile, on a slightly older pure64
clfs system I've been building my current desktop packages.  Just
noting for the record that it doesn't seem to be usable with kde:

 The patch applies fine, and gave me
I upgraded the versions of the "minimum kde" packages to 4.4.2 (i.e.
just enough for konqueror, okular, kmix).  Unfortunately, cmake
appears to be unable to find the shared

 I've already become antagonistic to kde4 because akonadi/pimlibs
appear to need static boost libs (and cmake is broken enough to
find a shared-only boost, but no static libs, and continue), now it
appears libQtUiTools has to be static.  I wish I'd spotted that
before the previous build - I've now lost interest in kde4 (I don't
wish to have to rebuild kde if a vulnerability is found in Qt).

 A shame, because konqueror4 appeared to render more nicely than
konqueror3 (better use of fonts), but the packages are all so
enormous that I'm probably better off without it.

 This dependency on static libs runs all the way through cmake -
it's arrogant enough to link itself to system libs _only_ if you
have all of its required libs (libxmlrpc_c isn't a common
requirement), so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that some of
the kde dependencies are static.  For me, it's too much aggravation.

das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list