[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#539687: marked as done (libogg-dev: Removal of .la should have been coordinated with other packages)

Le mardi 11 août 2009 à 08:05 +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo a écrit :
> I know this is 20/20 hindsight, but this could have been handled much
> better by raising bugs against and fixing all the client libraries
> *before* removing the libogg.la. It would probably also be a good idea
> to discourage the shipping .la files in the debian policy manual and
> adding it as a lintian warning.

I’d be all for a lintian warning for packages shipping a .la with a
non-empty dependency_libs field. However, adding a warning asking to
remove all .la files is a recipe for other disasters like the libogg

If we manage to clean up all dependency_libs fields before the squeeze
release, we can then remove all .la files in squeeze+1 without breaking
anything in the meantime. I’ve requested to add something to fix this in
#534966 but have received no answer so far.

 .''`.      Josselin Mouette
: :' :
`. `'   “I recommend you to learn English in hope that you in
  `-     future understand things”  -- Jörg Schilling

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

Reply to: