* Roger Leigh (roger@whinlatter.uklinux.net) wrote: > Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes: > > I'm not 100% sure but I actually thought that's what OpenLDAP used > > (libltdl) and it works just fine w/o the stupid .la files. > > Have you actually *used* libltdl yourself? For several reasons, it's > often best (when dynamically loading modules) to load the .la file > directly, and have libltdl do the magic of translating it to > whatever.so for you. Yes, actually, I have. A little anyway- modified OpenLDAP to use it somewhat more intelligently (and got upstream to include my changes, as I recall) and to *not* need the .la files. > If you're writing your program to work on multiple platforms, this > hides the issues you'll find: My issues here are with problems on Debian and not on other systems. .la files, libltdl, etc may be useful for other systems but if they don't work correctly on Debian then I've got issues with them. > You can do without the .la file, but IMHO it's too much hassle and > causes more problems than it solves. If you're having to worry about platforms that aren't Debian that may be the case. However, that's not what I'm referring to, and in fact consider it uninteresting. Stephen
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature