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

Bug#1015968: RFS: xbase64/3.1.2-14 -- xbase compatible C++ class library



On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 04:53:52PM +0200, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
>    Package name    : xbase64
>    Version         : 3.1.2-14

>  xbase64 (3.1.2-14) unstable; urgency=medium
>  .
>    * Migrate to debhelper-compat 13:
>      - debian/control: Add debhelper-compat (= 13).
>      - Remove debian/compat.
>      - Add usr/bin/xbase64-config into new debian/not-installed.
>      - Add usr/lib/${DEB_HOST_MULTIARCH}/libxbase64.la to
>          debian/libxbase64-bin.install.
>    * Declare compliance with Debian Policy 4.6.1.0 (No changes needed).
>    * debian/copyright:
>      - Add year 2022 to myself.
>    * Disable Link time optimization (Closes: #1015707):
>      - debian/rules: Add optimize=-lto to DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS.
>    * debian/control: Add Rules-Requires-Root: no.

Is there a reason you include the .la file?  From my experience it being
needed for anything suggests severe borkage, and the Policy concurs:

# [...] these files normally should not be included in the Debian package,
# since the information they include is not necessary to link with the
# shared library on Debian and can add unnecessary additional dependencies
# to other programs or libraries.

It then says:

# If the ".la" must be included, it should be included in the
# development ("-dev") package, unless the library will be loaded by
# "libtool"’s "libltdl" library. If it is intended for use with
# "libltdl", the ".la" files must go in the run-time library package.

libxbase64-bin is neither.


Meow!
-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ You should never, ever, degrade a human being by saying they're
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ a worthless waste of food and air.
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ You should also never anthropomorphize spammers and telemarketers.


Reply to: