[csw-maintainers] policy on .la files?

[Ben Walton]

Excerpts from Dagobert Michelsen's message of Sat Dec 13 07:26:28 -0500 2008:

Hi Dago,

> The OpenCSW standard says to exclude .la files. I just had
> a lively discussion with Phil wheter to change that and
> include .la-files again. If you have hard technical facts
> why to include them I would be interested to hear them.

I don't have a preference either way really.  I had simply noticed
that some systems (rhel, debian, csw) seemed to include more .la files
than others and was curious what others thought about it.  AFAIK, the
only real advantage to them is that it saves libtool having to go back
to 'first principles' later on...Since this is all done at the
packaging step though, I don't see it as a big deal.  _Some_ users
might be annoyed if they build things locally against CSW libs, as
they might miss having that info handy...but then again, on modern
systems...?  [Speaking as someone that only just recently retired some
sparc station 5's from active service! <grin>]

Thanks
-Ben
-- 
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302

GPG Key Id: 8E89F6D2; Key Server: pgp.mit.edu
Contact me to arrange for a CAcert assurance meeting.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20081213/4697c416/attachment.asc>