[OT] libtool .la files have absolute path's in them
On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 05:42:35PM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 04:32:06PM -0500, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > installed. I see quite a number of them in /usr/lib. (Look at it; note
> > that it has information about how the library is going to be installed,
> > etc; it's not meant to be installed itself.)
> An ever increasing number of packages are using libtool to do their linking.
> The latest GNU libtools (>= 1.3a) can take advantage of the metadata in the
> installed libtool archive files (*.la files). The main advantage of
> libtool's .la files is that it allows libtool to store and subsequently
> access metadata with respect to the libraries it builds. libtool will search
> for those files, which contain a lot of useful information about a library
> (such as library dependency information for static linking). Also, they're
> essential for programs using libltdl.
> Packages that use libtool to create shared libraries should include the .la
> files in the -dev package, unless the package relies on libtool's libltdl
> library, in which case the .la files must go in the run-time library
well I really don't like all the absolute paths in the .la files.
I think all installed files should be location independent.
RPM has locationindependant pkg's and Debian doesn't. I find this a
great disadvantage. It would make transitions (like /usr/doc ->
/usr/share/doc) and local mods much easier.
(btw: Ofcourse I agree with .la files being installed.)