[Fedora-packaging] Re: libtool(.la) archive policy proposal

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Oct  6, 2006, Rex Dieter <rdieter at math.unl.edu> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Oct  5, 2006, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> wrote:

>>> So? That's not a problem with the mentioned patch.

>> Ignoring dependency_libs would break the following case:
>> - libA.la, static only...

> 2.  Good thing we don't package static libs (or at least *strongly*
> discouraged).

This is too narrow a vision.

Fedora is a major development platform for packages that ship
libtool-using packages for many different platforms.

If we break libtool such that it still works for us, but won't work
for others, people who develop their packages on Fedora will think
libtool will get them the portability they expect, but it won't
because Fedora broke the portability.

Thinking of Fedora-only changes for libtool is completely missing the
point about how libtool is used.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Secretary for FSF Latin America        http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}