Re: PROPOSAL: libtool archive (`*.la) files in `-dev' packages
On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 05:48:06PM -0700, Joey Hess wrote:
>
> Can you get more details? I'm concerned that though .la files may be useful
> on some architectures libtool supports, they may be quite useless in debian.
> Reading some .la files, they seem to contain only things like libraries the
> library depends on and versioning info. Is there really any info in
> those files that cannot be obtained in other ways on linux?
Debian != Linux.
Not that the Hurd would require the *.la files. But should we really ignore
a possibility to enhance the interoperability (and portability) of our
software, when the cost is so low?
It is not as if we speak about googles of MegaByte here. It's one small text
file < 4kb for each -dev package that uses libtool. What a deal!
> I'd like some concrete advantages be be found before we make this policy.
It's probably difficult to quantify the advantages involved. However, it is
very easy to quantify the disadvantages, which are --><-- so small.
Nobody did see a disadvantage in the Architecture: field of dpkg when it was
created. Now it appears that we can do a better job with using the more
complex but more powerful dependency field for this purpose. My main point
is that we should try to steer in direction of more compatibility. libtool
is not an esoteric concept. It is part of the powerful GNU configuration
tools, and used in literally dozens of packages.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
"The purpose of Free Software is Free Software.
The End and the Means are the same." -- Craig Sanders
Marcus Brinkmann <Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Reply to: