On 04/28/2012 04:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 08:56:20AM -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> On 04/28/2012 04:57 AM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> What does the Packaging Committee think about the following?
is the review request for libkdtree++
>> That is a C++ template container implementation, which does not build a
>> shared library file to link with, but ships only C++ templates in header
>> The resulting -devel package needs to be handled in the same way than
>> a -static library package. Whenever there are important fixes in the
>> templates, dependencies may need to be rebuilt. Not limited to security
>> vulnerabilities. Any bug-fixes in the template implementation would only
>> propagate to applications when rebuilding the application packages.
> +1, sounds similar to eigen2-devel and eigen3-devel
+1 as well.
At first thought, I was inclined to agree, but ...
... where do you want to draw the line between "static template usage"
and "regular external code usage"?
These days, almost all C++ packages export C++-template headers, which
occassionally can be used without pulling in explicit library linkage.
Similar considerations apply to plain C-packages which, may contain
freestanding inline-code and/or freestanding-defines.
I.e. I think this proposal is not clear enough to be applicable.