On 2014-02-17 16:44, Ken Brown wrote:
On 2/17/2014 3:25 PM, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
On 2014-02-17 13:28, Ken Brown wrote:
If not, can the .la files for those three libraries be added to the
x86_64 distro?
That's clearly not necessary. The real question is if we should be
providing static libraries. Fedora has moved away from them for the
most part (and they also remove .la files), and we have been doing the
same for a while. Keeping in mind that there is no completely static
linkage on Cygwin, and we already have a dynamically linked texlive in
the distro, I'm not convinced that there is a real need to provide
static libraries for all of its many dependencies.
But as I wrote that, it occurred to me that IIRC texlive can be built
with either system or bundled dependencies. Wouldn't their distribution
be built with --without-system-*?
Yes, for all the libraries that they bundle. But they don't bundle the
three libraries I mentioned. So my revised request is that Cygwin
provide static libraries for fontconfig, expat, and freetype. If you
think this is inappropriate, can you suggest another way for me to deal
with the problem? I could of course build the static libraries myself,
but then it becomes difficult for others to replicate the build.
Fontconfig is the main culprit here (the others are its own deps), but
AFAICS these are not bundled on purpose, and should indeed be linked
dynamically:
https://www.tug.org/pipermail/tex-live/2006-October/011366.html
The reasoning there is sound IMO. Furthermore, the TeX Live guide
implies a runtime dependency on fontconfig for all *NIX systems (see
sections 3.1.1, 3.1.4, and 3.4.4):
https://www.tug.org/texlive/doc/texlive-en/texlive-en.html
Therefore, I believe the correct course of action here is to fix the
texlive build system to not insist on static fontconfig and deps.
Wherever it is in the xetex build, change those flags to "-Wl,-Bdynamic
-lfontconfig -lexpat -lfreetype -Wl,-Bstatic".