Bug#561413: Policy possibly should not recommend *.la files

[Bill Allombert <Bill.Allombert@math.u-bordeaux1.fr>]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 02:42:06PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Package: debian-policy
> Version: 3.8.3.0
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> Policy currently says:
> 
>     An ever increasing number of packages are using libtool to do their
>     linking. The latest GNU libtools (>= 1.3a) can take advantage of the
>     metadata in the installed libtool archive files (*.la files). 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.
>     libtool will search for those files, which contain a lot of useful
>     information about a library (such as library dependency information for
>     static linking). Also, they're *essential* for programs using
>     libltdl.
> 
> Given the various problems that we've run into with *.la files, particularly
> around adding unnecessary shared library dependencies, I wonder if this
> paragraph should be revised to be a bit less encouraging about retaining
> *.la files. 

Agreed.

> (Although I suppose that this may change if binutils-gold and
> its --as-needed default becomes the default linker.)

binutils-gold currently only support a subset of Debian plateforms:
(amd64, armel, i386, powerpc, sparc).

Cheers,
-- 
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>

Imagine a large red swirl here.