Re: Seeking help to resolve a lintian request
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, 19 Sep 2002, Simon Richter wrote:
> > That .la files are close to useless on GNU systems does not make them
> > less valuable for portable programs, and unless you want each developer
> > to patch them out in his .diff.gz (because a good upstream wouldn't
> > accept a patch that breaks his program on many platforms), your best
> > option is to leave them in and make sure they don't stand in the way
> > (which is possible).
> Wrong. You refresh libtool on the debian-packaged version of the software,
> and don't bother upstream. Debian libtool should be patched to kill the .la
And what happens when the upstream developers themselves use Debian?
Then they will be shipping a crippled ltmain.sh in their distribution
tarballs. That's *bad*.
libtool the package isn't used directly--it's copied into the source
tree with libtoolize, and so modifying the Debian libtool will affect
every user of a source tree which was libtoolized by and distributed
from a Debian system. Modifying libtool won't just affect the
Surely just not packaging the .la file is the answer (or just let it
stay unnoticed in the -dev package)?
"Liberty and Livelihood"
Support the Countryside Alliance