[bug#43204] [PATCH] gnu: taglib: Propagate zlib.

[Pierre Langlois]

Ludovic Courtès writes:

> Hi!
>
> Pierre Langlois <pierre.langlois@gmx.com> skribis:
>
>> Actually, thinking about this a little more, I'm not sure I understand
>> upstream decision to propagate -lz. The commit fixes [0] which indicates
>> it's so that taglib can be linked statically, but then that means if
>> we're dynamically linking, the application will also dynamically link
>> with zlib when it doesn't need to (at least not directly). And in guix
>> we only build shared libs for taglib so we're never statically linking
>> it AFAIK.
>>
>> So, here I'm a bit torn here, should we just follow what upstream is
>> indicating? Even it doesn't look right to me, but I might be wrong! Or,
>> should we revert the change that propagates -lz?
>
> I had the following patch that I intended to push, to avoid propagation.
>
> WDYT?
>
> Ludo’.
>
> commit d8124a707602980556fd33c7dbf9f7483fe1d0df
> Author: Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>
> Date:   Mon Sep 7 09:56:08 2020 +0200
>
>     gnu: taglib: 'taglib-config --libs' shows -L flag for zlib.
>     
>     Fixes compilation of emacs-emms-print-metadata.
>     
>     * gnu/packages/mp3.scm (taglib)[arguments]: Add #:phases.

LGTM!

I was originally thinking we could just drop the `-lz`, since it
/should/ only be needed for people who statically link with taglib, and
we only ship shared libs. But actually, it's probably safer to follow
what upstream is doing.

Thanks,
Pierre

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature