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

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 26 August 2009 16:30:06 Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Russ Allbery wrote on Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 07:35:53AM CEST:
> > dlopened modules are something of a special case; it's one of the places
> > where Debian may not remove *.la files depending on the specific
> > situation.
>
> I have a question here, since it seems some of the involved people are
> reading:  is there a chance distributions would re-add .la files if the
> indirect deplib linkage issue is out of the way?
>
> Because AFAIR there were more issues, and that this wouldn't really
> change the situation enough.

Gentoo culls the libtool linker script for libraries that have no direct 
dependency info.  while we know this situation sucks, we dont feel like going 
the extra step of breaking packages that currently rely on this info.

could you elaborate on other issues here ?  if this dep issue were fixed, then 
on an up-to-date Linux system, i dont know of any info that the libtool linker 
script provides that would necessitate keeping it around for any installed 
library.

i can understand plugins that get loaded via libltdl ...
-mike

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.