On Oct 12, 2006, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm(a)ATrpms.net> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 05:01:03PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On GNU/Linux, with the further constraint of not using static
> libraries, and only installing libraries in directories searched by
> both ld and ld.so, you don't lose or miss anything.
So you would lose on /opt and if some lib needs static linking, and
this decision is non-local as you properly explained in some other
part of this thread. E.g. we would globally remove degrees of freedom
for little gain.
Right. Keeping the .la files for these rare cases makes a lot of
sense to me. I get the impression they never occur in Fedora packages
(I mean Core and Extras here, not packages *for* Fedora), so the
Fedora policy might very well rule out .la files entirely, even if
with a rationale explaining the assumptions behind it and
recommendations about when to break this rule in third-party packages.
--
Alexandre Oliva
http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Secretary for FSF Latin America
http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva(a){redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva(a){lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}