On Don, 2010-09-16 at 11:24 -0400, Chris King wrote: > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 5:07 AM, Julien Cristau <jcris...@debian.org> wrote: > > Is there a reason why it should? > > Yes, for anybody who wants to statically link the GLX OpenGL library > :) Most other -dev packages in Debian provide static libraries, since > they're very useful for testing.
I'm leaning towards considering libgl1-mesa-swx11-dev shipping libGL.a a mistake rather than libgl1-mesa-dev not shipping one. > My specific use case is in making an interposer library. I need to > re-export hundreds of OpenGL functions unchanged while providing > replacements for a couple; it is possible to do this using dlopen, but > unwieldy since I must write a stub for every function. Having a > static library available would make this trivial. The downside is that the wrapper becomes specific to the libGL linked statically, whereas a dlopen based wrapper would work with any libGL conforming to the libGL ABI. Surely the stub generation can be automated at least to some degree, maybe the Mesa glapi scripts can be (ab)used for that. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.vmware.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org