Bug#37257: marked as done ([PROPOSED] libtool `.la' files in `-dev' packages)
Your message dated Sat, 8 May 1999 16:40:11 -0500 (CDT)
with message-id <199905082142.QAA07269@taumsauk.cs.wustl.edu>
and subject line reopening as AMENDMENT
has caused the attached bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I'm
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Ian Jackson
(administrator, Debian bugs database)
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 6 May 1999 22:36:57 +0000
Received: (qmail 14420 invoked from network); 6 May 1999 22:36:57 -0000
Received: from cs.wustl.edu (HELO taumsauk.cs.wustl.edu) (root@128.252.165.15)
by master.debian.org with SMTP; 6 May 1999 22:36:57 -0000
Received: from cs.wustl.edu (bambuca.cs.wustl.edu [128.252.165.209])
by taumsauk.cs.wustl.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA17123
for <submit@bugs.debian.org>; Thu, 6 May 1999 17:36:53 -0500 (CDT)
Message-Id: <199905062236.RAA17123@taumsauk.cs.wustl.edu>
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 17:34:46 -0500 (CDT)
From: Ossama Othman <othman@cs.wustl.edu>
Subject: [PROPOSED] libtool `.la' files in `-dev' packages
To: submit@bugs.debian.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Package: debian-policy
Version: 2.5.0.0
-----------
Please forgive this repeat post. This is just a post so that I can get
my proposal into the BTS.
-----------
The latest GNU libtools (>= 1.3a) can take advantage of installed
libtool archive files (`*.la'). According to Thomas Tanner (one of the
GNU libtool maintainers):
Version >= 1.3a of libtool will search for those
files, which contain a lot of useful information
about a library (e.g. dependency libraries for
static linking). Also, they're essential for programs
using libltdl.
As such, installing the `.la' files in `-dev' packages seems like a
good idea, especially for static linking issues. Many developers do not
include the `.la' files in the `-dev' packages. My proposal is to make
packages that use libtool to create shared libraries install the
generated `.la' files in corresponding `-dev' packages.
------
Statements from Gary Vaughan <gary@oranda.demon.co.uk>, one of the
libtool maintainers:
An ever increasing number of packages are using libtool to do their linking,
and I would estimate that about 20-40% of GNU packages already do so. The
main advantage of libtool's .la files is that it allows libtool to store and
subsequently access metadata with respect to the libraries it builds.
...
Certainly libtool is fully capable of linking against shared libraries which
don't have .la files, but being a mere shell script it can add considerably
to the build time of a libtool using package if that shellscript has to derive
all this infomation from first principles for each library every time it is
linked.
With the advent of libtool-1.4 (and to a lesser extent libtool-1.3), the .la
files will also store information about inter-library dependencies which
cannot necessarily be derived after the .la file is deleted. Thomas can
probably explain this a lot better than I can, so I won't muddy the waters
with a poor example of my own.
-----
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <othman@cs.wustl.edu>
Center for Distributed Object Computing, Washington University, St. Louis
58 60 1A E8 7A 66 F4 44 74 9F 3C D4 EF BF 35 88 1024/8A04D15D 1998/08/26
Reply to: