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

Michael Schwendt bugs.michael at gmx.net
Thu Jan 18 00:10:56 UTC 2007

On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 00:15:10 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:

> So let me ask again: What's really that bad about including the
> current *.la files into devel by default (unless really needed in main
> packages) other than a couple more dependencies between *-devel
> packages and how bad are these "bloated" devel interdependencies?

Unfortunately, the "couple of more dependencies" is visible in the
BuildRequires tree, too. It results in pretty much the opposite of trying
to eliminate superfluous and redundant BR. You will find that packagers
will be confronted again and again with missing BR which are only needed
because of direct dependencies between .la files or changes within the
libtool dep-chain. Stuff that comes and goes as packages in the chain
change. Even worse than the "bloat" is when upstream developers modify
their software, so that the .la dep-chain is changed, too (e.g. by adding
or removing inter-library dependencies or by inserting bugs into the .la
templates). IIRC, bugzilla has quite some tales to tell about such

More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list