Re: Excluding Dynamically Linked Libraries

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Chuck Wolber wrote on Thu, Feb 16, 2006 at 07:33:22PM CET:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2006, Stepan Kasal wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 11:23:00PM -0800, Chuck Wolber wrote:
> > > [...] Yet, when I build it, the resulting binary still 
> > > requires libbz2 at runtime.
> > 
> > I cannot guess the reason from your story.

Me neither.  Are you trying to just eliminate the dependency upon the
shared library libbz2 or are you trying to operate out all bz2
functionality from rpm?  If the former, why don't you just link libbz2
statically into the rpm executable?  Same goes for other libraries, of
course.

> > It would help if you could 
> > post the results of your work: please tell us the URL of the source 
> > package you are using, and put somewhere on the web your patch (or post 
> > the patch, maybe compressed).
> 
> Thank you. I have tar'd up the patches and the source I am using. I have 
> also included a README file explaining how to very quickly simulate what I 
> am seeing, as well as scripts that do all of the heavy lifting. It can all 
> be found here:

Please don't assume others have your build environment; not everyone
uses the same base distribution that you do.  The patches in that
tarball look huge and complicated: you should not try to patch generated
files such as configure, Makefile.in, and IMVHO you should not try to
remove configure.ac.

Please explain from a higher level point of view what your real
objective is.  Then we can maybe point out what's wrong with that
objective, and _then_ it should be much easier to go into details
in how the fixed objective can be realized.

Cheers,
Ralf