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

Alexandre Oliva aoliva at redhat.com
Thu Oct 5 05:15:58 UTC 2006

On Oct  2, 2006, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net> wrote:

> So, if libtool were to simply ignore dependency_libs when building
> against shared libs wouldn't that solve all issues?

Nope, it would only solve the common case.

It is perfectly possible for a dynamic library to depend on a
static-only library.  And it's even possible to create other dynamic
libraries out of that, if the static-only library is PIC or the
platform can handle non-PIC in dynamic libraries.

> If so the patch looks almost trivial and is far better than to setup
> workflows on whether removing some *.la files and still have some
> false positives/negatives.

Breaking the libtool sources that get installed for packagers all over
the world to use, for deployment on various operating systems, is not
really an option I'd recommend.

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