> semantics) hitting so many packages is a very bad idea and that it's
> unrealistic to get them all fixed for F13.
+ 1...speaking as somebody who's fixed dozens of packages after the F11
and F12 mass rebuilds and looking at the loooooong list referenced above
(about a double of what failed in F12).
Also I have really doubts what concerns upstreamability of the necessary
changes in packages. Especially if other distributions will (???)
continue shipping ld with the traditional semantics, this means hours of
headache discussions with upstream not willing to accept the patch.
And...sorry for a stupid question: is there any other benefit than the
one described in the wiki? Because otherwise I'm really wondering
whether this pays off. How often does this happen that an application
gets broken due to a removal of implicitly linked library in a required
package? Any statistics or reports e.g. from BZ?
I don't have the skills to assess the impact and need of this -- but
still some more consideration on such a change (which means huge amount
of work on the side of packagers -- or at least should mean, provided
everybody will follow the "WhyUpstream" policy) would be appreciated.