[Fedora-packaging] exemptions for .la files in some -devel packages ?

[Jeremy Hinegardner]

Hi all,

I'm doing a couple of Merge Reviews for apr[1] and apr-util[2] and there
seems to be an issue over the inclusion of the .la files in the
apr-devel and apr-util-devel rpms.

According to the Review Guidelines .la files are NOT allowed, but I have
been informed via the bugzilla tickets that the .la files in these
packages are required and cannot be removed.

I do not have enough insight on libtool archives to render a decision
here, so from my perspective, it appears that one of two things must
happen:

1) There needs to be a clarification in the Review Guidelines regarding
   .la files that there are rare(?) instances where .la files are
   required and either list them or bring them up on a case-by-case
   basis to this list.

2) There is a misunderstanding from the packagers perspective on this
   issue.

I'm initially assuming that the former is the correct approach here and
just want to get confirmation from the list, as I'm probably newer than
most at this process. 

enjoy,

-jeremy

[1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225253
[2] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225254


-- 
========================================================================
 Jeremy Hinegardner                              jeremy at hinegardner.org 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20070408/c3a5d70b/attachment.sig>