[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: question towards "freetype transition; improved library handling needed for all C/C++ packages"

On Sun, Dec 11, 2005 at 11:17:51AM -0500, Benjamin Mesing wrote:

> today I've tried to address the issue raised by Steve Langasek regarding
> "inherited" dependencies [1]. 
> As I am unexperienced with the whole linking and dependency process I
> was not able to deduce the consequences of this announcement for my
> packaging. 
> As far as I have understood the email, whatever is added to the linker
> on the command line (using -l...) is also added to the package as a
> dependency. Is this correct (the depends line of my package is: 
>         Depends: apt, ${shlibs:Depends}, ${misc:Depends}
> )? 

> I believe my package is affected by the issues stated by Steve,
> depending on libraries which I do not directly use. Most of them are
> probably pulled in through the QT library I am depending on. My package,
> packagesearch, uses qmake as a build tool. The linking command line
> contains loads of other libraries including freetype (collected by
> qmake).
> In this scenario how should I proceed? Steve's hints seem to apply
> mostly to library packages, and due to using qmake are not applicable
> for me anyways. Should I go with his last hint to use -Wl,--as-needed?

These recommendations are not specific to library packages; they apply
equally well to libraries and applications.  You're right that packagesearch
is pulling in lots of dependencies that it doesn't need.  I wasn't aware
there were any qmake-specific bugs in this area, but I'll take a look and
see what I can find out.  In general, though, qmake seems to suffer from
heavy NIH, so I don't hold out much hope for an easy fix.

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org                                   http://www.debian.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: