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

Alexandre Oliva aoliva at redhat.com
Fri Oct 13 18:04:33 UTC 2006

On Oct 13, 2006, Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz at informatik.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:

> Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat.com> writes:

>> /me wonders if his reasoning breaks if both libfoo and libbar are in
>> the same package.

> no; 'libbar.la' might be used by a 'libbaz.la' loadable module which is
> added to the repository a year later by a different maintainer.

Not if libbar.la was not installed.

> Exactly. Because (usually) main packages (e.g. this with 'libfoo.la')
> must not depend on -devel packages, the required 'libbar.la' must not be
> in -devel but in a main package.

But if you add the .la to the main package, that brings in references
to the .so and .a files, if present, so you'd then have to add the
undesired dependency.

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}

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list