[Fedora-packaging] Re: LibtoolArchives, v0.3

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Wed Jan 17 15:27:36 UTC 2007

On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 08:25:09AM -0600, Rex Dieter wrote:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/LibtoolArchives
> Motivation
> (AFAICT) The intent of the original guideline was to avoid problematic 
> libtool archives1, those used in linking, not necessarily those used for 
> loadable modules, plugins, etc...
> While .la files outside of $LD_LIBRARY_PATH SHOULD be ok to omit, 
> (AFAIK) keeping them causes no harm either, so shouldn't be a MUST to 
> remove. Problem is, there are quite a few software packages that require 
> .la files for proper function (including some kde bits, though this is 
> being worked on).
> Comments?
> -- Rex

I think we should fix that upstream, we know the authors are willing
to fix it, but they asked for some use case to demonstrate the

The biggest problem *.la inclusing/exclusion have cost are endless
recurring discussions on working around the current state of affairs
(deleting all, keeping all, deleting some, deleting some more, and
still being surprised when kde or something else will pick up
non-devel *.la functionality etc.).
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20070117/75c04eed/attachment.sig>

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list