Post by Ãscar GarcÃa Amor
Some days ago the pandoc mantainer  do a rebuild of it  where
add a lot of haskell package dependencies. I think that the build
changes the binary from statically linked to dinamically linked, but
IMHO, I prefer the static one (55,08 MiB of package) over the dinamic
(more than 666 MB in libraries).
What do you think about this?
Other solution can be have other package "pandoc-static", that
maintains the previous method of package.
And same with shellcheck -- the general issue is that *all*
haskell-based packages now build dynamically linked against the haskell
runtime (which is huge, and few people have more than one or two
packages that need it).
Seems like the official response is "just live with it, no one cares
what you say".
Which, to be fair, has some justification in that technically speaking,
statically-compiled haskell programs were an ugly bug. It's just a pity
haskell is such a terribly bloated ecosystem. :p
That being said, there are pandoc-lite and shellcheck-static packages in
the AUR which use upstream's prebuilt binaries and don't require the
whole haskell ecosystem as a dependency. Which seems fairly reasonable