Re: removal of .la files from Debian and a possible solution to the libtool shared libs problem

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 05:01:18AM CEST:
> Is someone here willing to contribute a portable m4 macro which
> tests the compiler (and/or linker) to prove beyond a shadow of a
> doubt that it adequately supports the implicit linkage required? The
> tests should work for more than Linux and should be based on
> observed behavior.

Is support in Debian full now?  Do dlopen'ed modules that have indirect
dependencies outside of default-searched library paths get loaded
correctly now, with DT_RPATH entries only pointing to direct deplibs
(and recursively for their DT_RPATH entries)?

> Support for indirect dependencies should be a configure option so
> that it should be specifically requested.

See $link_all_deplibs (which is "no" on Debian but "yes" in FSF
Libtool).

Cheers,
Ralf