Re: removal of .la files from Debian and a possible solution to the libtool shared libs problem

[Russ Allbery]

Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden> writes:
> * Russ Allbery wrote on Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 07:35:53AM CEST:

>> dlopened modules are something of a special case; it's one of the
>> places where Debian may not remove *.la files depending on the specific
>> situation.

> I have a question here, since it seems some of the involved people are
> reading:  is there a chance distributions would re-add .la files if the
> indirect deplib linkage issue is out of the way?

So far as I know, that's the only thing that's driving Debian this
direction right now.  I think there may be some reluctance to re-add them
without an understanding of why they're useful for system libraries that
come with the distribution, since there's a general perception right now
that on a Linux system they're mostly useless, but I think people are open
to being convinced there.

The only *problem* that I'm aware of them causing at the moment is the
increased shared library dependencies.

-- 
Russ Allbery (address@hidden)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>