[csw-maintainers] [csw-buildfarm] FYI: Temporarily deactivation .la-files

[Peter FELECAN]

Dagobert Michelsen <dam at opencsw.org> writes:

> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 22.01.2009 um 18:30 schrieb Peter FELECAN:
>> Eric J Korpela <korpela at opencsw.org> writes:
>>> In some cases I'm having the opposite problem because of missing
>>> dependencies that were supposed to be in the .la files of packages
>>> where the .la files were not installed.
>>>
>>> Shouldn't problems in .la files be reported as bugs to the package
>>> maintainers?  If a package includes them it's up the the maintainers
>>> to see that they are correct, no?
>>
>> Indeed, the .la files *are* useful and not having them is a pain... If
>> the paths in the .la files are incorrect it *is* a bug and *must* be
>> corrected.
>
> The reason for officially banning .la-files in new packages is that
> you can get in a situation where you cannot build a software when
> an old version is installed because libtool picks up the old files
> and links against the old libs.

There is no way to prohibit the usage of the old, installed .la
files when building the new package? It seems to me a less brutal
approach.


>> BTW, moving the .la files as you have done can be disruptive for
>> activities of other maintainers and, IMHO should be done on a test
>> system.
>
> I am really sorry for that. I'll undo my changes in an hour and promise
> to keep away from using misusing my root powers again *-)

It's alright, my observation was just a question of principle.
-- 
Peter