Package: libppl-swi Version: 0.11.2-3 Severity: normal User: codehelp@debian.org Usertags: la-file-removal To finish an old release goal from Squeeze, to comply with Policy 10.2 and to ease the introduction of MultiArch, I'm filing bugs against packages which contain .la files which can be either removed or stripped of the dependency_libs variable. http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/LAFileRemoval http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00055.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00199.html Data has been obtained from the output of an automated script: http://release.debian.org/~aba/la/current.txt The output is best read in conjunction with the criteria from this post to debian-devel: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00808.html To generate the list of packages, I've used: grep -v depended-on current.txt |cut -d: -f1 The data is regularly updated but please accept my apologies if you have made an upload which changes the situation since the data was parsed. libppl-swi (0.11.2-3) appears in this list as a source package because one or more of the binary packages (usually -dev packages) contain .la files. In this case, the .la file is in libppl-swi: /usr/lib/ppl/libppl_swiprolog.la # Libraries that this one depends upon. dependency_libs=' /usr/lib/libppl.la -L/usr/lib /usr/lib/libpwl.la /usr/lib/libgmpxx.la /usr/lib/libgmp.la' In most cases, the .la file(s) can simply be removed as the process behind this MBF has already identified that there are no further dependencies using the .la file. In the unusual case that your package uses libltdl directly, it is still necessary to empty the dependency_libs part of all .la files remaining in the package. If you believe that your package needs both the .la file and the dependency_libs settings, please raise this on debian-devel for clarification. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
pgpki9VslTyfS.pgp
Description: PGP signature