Re: libpkg-guide updated (versioned symbols), please proofread
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 07:31:09AM -0400, Stephen Frost wrote:
> * Steve Langasek (email@example.com) wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 07:55:36PM -0700, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > > What about static linking? (the "other" role of -dev packages)
> > If there are consumer applications that use libtool, and the library
> > they're statically linking against provides a .la file, it makes sense
> > for there to be dependency relationships between the -dev packages. In
> > practice, since almost nothing in Debian gets linked statically, I'm not
> > sure there's much ground for requiring a Depends: for this case alone.
> I'm not inclined to agree with even this. libtool generating .la files
> isn't a justification to add a Depends any more than me adding a .sfrost
> file to my packages would be. It's an informational file as far as I'm
> concerned, it certainly isn't necessary.
My point had nothing to do with .la files. -dev packages contain a .a file,
which is pretty much entirely useless without the other libraries upon which