[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: .la libtool libraries - to package or not?



On Tuesday 11 March 2003 03:02 am, Axel Thimm wrote:
> There are some packages deleting/excluding these files from
> the buildroot while other do keep them explicitely. What are
> the reasons for doing so? Are the reasons for not including
> *.la files still valid today?
>
> E.g. what should the current rpm policy concerning including
> *.la files (in -devel packages) be?

My personal preference is to include them in the devel 
subpackages myself--they're small compared to the rest of the 
package, so I say no harm done.  One of the problems, though, is 
that they sometimes end up carrying traces of the 
build-root/build-dir unless you edit that stuff out.  So to have 
really correct .la scripts, you have to do some extra work.

Also, there's another thing about .la scripts--some software 
(like sawfish, rep-gtk, and kde3) requires the .la scripts to be 
present at runtime for some reason.  Not sure why.

-- 
Kelledin
"If a server crashes in a server farm and no one pings it, does 
it still cost four figures to fix?"





[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] []