DAEValidatorLibrary is built and linked against but not installed

[hobbes1069]

Which gives the following error in the Fedora update system:

results:
- arch: x86_64
  checkname: dist.rpmdeplint
  item: openCOLLADA-1.6.62-1.fc28
  outcome: FAILED
  scenario: x86_64
  type: koji_build

nothing provides libDAEValidatorLibrary.so()(64bit) needed by openCOLLADA-utils-1.6.62-1.fc28.x86_64
nothing provides libDAEValidatorLibrary.so()(64bit) needed by openCOLLADA-utils-1.6.62-1.fc28.x86_64

[hobbes1069]

Ok, whoops, looks like someone modified my package... Should these get installed?

bin/COLLADAPhysX3Schema.xsd
bin/DAEValidator
bin/OpenCOLLADAValidator bin/collada_schema_1_4_1.xsd
bin/collada_schema_1_5.xsd

???

[hobbes1069]

Making the library static fixed it for me...

--- a/DAEValidator/CMakeLists.txt
+++ b/DAEValidator/CMakeLists.txt
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ set(DAEValidatorLibrarySources
        library/include/XmlSchema.h
     library/include/win/dirent.h
 )
-add_library(DAEValidatorLibrary ${DAEValidatorLibrarySources})
+add_library(DAEValidatorLibrary STATIC ${DAEValidatorLibrarySources})
 include_directories("library/include")

[hobbes1069]

I'm willing to do a pull request but which why should I go? Install the library or build as static if DAEValidator is the only consumer of the library?

[mbarnes-sb]

I think you should keep the .so because DAEValidatorLibrary is intended to provide validation and coherency check services to any application, not just the one tool. It's analogous to an XML parser vs a validating XML parser.

[hobbes1069]

Ok, when I have some spare cycles I'll see about updating the cmake config to properly install it.