xfce 4.2.1 packages available
rdieter at math.unl.edu
Mon Mar 21 13:38:03 UTC 2005
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 13:01 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>>Our Linux's run-time and build-time linkers don't need the libtool
>>archives. Often the added inter-library dependency information in these
>>files require unneeded explicit package dependencies, too.
> Whether you like it or not, these dependencies exist. libtool only makes
> these dependencies explicit - However there exist broken versions of
> libtool and mal-configured packages which produce broken *.la's.
In my experience, 95% time, Michael is right. libtool often introduces
many needless dependancies. Here's a thought example (I can give you
many real examples if you want too):
libfoo1-devel contains a (shared) library linked against libfoo2, so
it's .la file (libfoo1.la) contains explicit references to either
libfoo2.la and/or -lfoo2
Build application foobar, that links against libfoo1. Despite the fact
the foobar makes no direct use of any libfoo2 symbol or function, foobar
1. BuildRequires: libfoo2-devel
2. Requires: libfoo2 (an rpm-generated dependancy)
Neither of which is required nor desired.
More information about the fedora-extras-list