On Tue, 31 May 2011 18:48:30 +0200
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2011-05-30 12:16:13 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> > libtool .la files are useful if:
> >
> > * you're linking against a library installed in a directory that isn't
> > searched by the dynamic linker by default (e.g. installing a l
On 2011-05-30 12:16:13 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> libtool .la files are useful if:
>
> * you're linking against a library installed in a directory that isn't
> searched by the dynamic linker by default (e.g. installing a local
> library in --prefix=$HOME, and a program that links that libr
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 12:16:13PM +0100, Simon McVittie wrote:
> On Mon, 30 May 2011 at 12:23:35 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > They are at least read by libtool. For instance, when building MPFR
> > (as a normal user):
> [...]
> > Either the information provided by /usr/lib/libgmp.la is import
On Mon, 30 May 2011 at 12:23:35 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> They are at least read by libtool. For instance, when building MPFR
> (as a normal user):
[...]
> Either the information provided by /usr/lib/libgmp.la is important
> and this file should be kept, or libtool should not attempt to read
On Mon, 30 May 2011 12:23:35 +0200
Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2011-05-27 00:17:45 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Am 26.05.2011 23:26, schrieb Luk Claes:
> >
> > > There are some good reasons to keep some specific *.la files around,
> >
> > Just curious: what are these reasons / use case for k
On 2011-05-27 00:17:45 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 26.05.2011 23:26, schrieb Luk Claes:
>
> > There are some good reasons to keep some specific *.la files around,
>
> Just curious: what are these reasons / use case for keeping la files?
They are at least read by libtool. For instance, when
On Thu, 26 May 2011 23:26:26 +0200
Luk Claes wrote:
> On 05/26/2011 11:55 AM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> > Am 26.05.2011 10:46, schrieb Simon McVittie:
> >> On Thu, 26 May 2011 at 08:47:06 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> >>> Comments welcome, but foremost I'd like a mass effort to clear the
> >>> remaining
On Fri, 27 May 2011 00:17:45 +0200
Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 26.05.2011 23:26, schrieb Luk Claes:
>
> > There are some good reasons to keep some specific *.la files around,
>
> Just curious: what are these reasons / use case for keeping la files?
Plugins which us libltdl use the .la file but t
Am 26.05.2011 23:26, schrieb Luk Claes:
> There are some good reasons to keep some specific *.la files around,
Just curious: what are these reasons / use case for keeping la files?
--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?
On 05/26/2011 06:04 PM, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [Michael Biebl]
>> Clearing the dependency_libs is always safe, afaics, so I'd rather say it is
>> something like
>>
>> if depended-on
>> clear dependency_libs
>> else
>> remove *.la files
>
> Seems like the following would work instead
On 05/26/2011 11:55 AM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 26.05.2011 10:46, schrieb Simon McVittie:
>> On Thu, 26 May 2011 at 08:47:06 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Comments welcome, but foremost I'd like a mass effort to clear the
>>> remaining dependency_libs fields! :-)
>>
>> Am I right in thinking that t
[Michael Biebl]
> Clearing the dependency_libs is always safe, afaics, so I'd rather say it is
> something like
>
> if depended-on
> clear dependency_libs
> else
> remove *.la files
Seems like the following would work instead:
remove *.la files
if depended-on
request
Le jeudi 26 mai 2011 à 12:26 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :
> Do anyone perhaps have an opinion on Peter's suggestion in that
> bugreport?:
>
> > I think in order of preference, this should be fixed by patching
> > libtool, or by a debhelper tool, and only then maybe in cdbs. This
> > way
On 11-05-26 at 11:16am, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > sed -i "/dependency_libs/ s/'.*'/''/"
> > "$(CURDIR)/debian//usr/lib/"
> >
> > Comments welcome, but foremost I'd like a mass effort to clear the
> > remaining dependency_libs fields! :-)
>
> gnome-pkg-tools package is already providi
Am 26.05.2011 10:46, schrieb Simon McVittie:
> On Thu, 26 May 2011 at 08:47:06 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
>> Comments welcome, but foremost I'd like a mass effort to clear the
>> remaining dependency_libs fields! :-)
>
> Am I right in thinking that this is the process people should follow?
>
> if de
Hi,
> sed -i "/dependency_libs/ s/'.*'/''/"
> "$(CURDIR)/debian//usr/lib/"
>
> Comments welcome, but foremost I'd like a mass effort to clear the
> remaining dependency_libs fields! :-)
gnome-pkg-tools package is already providing a cdbs makefile snippet
that does the same thing on all .la files
On Thu, 26 May 2011 at 08:47:06 +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> Comments welcome, but foremost I'd like a mass effort to clear the
> remaining dependency_libs fields! :-)
Am I right in thinking that this is the process people should follow?
if depended-on:
if dependency_libs:
clear the depe
17 matches
Mail list logo
