On 07-10-2010 08:21:19 +0200, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Do note: I have nothing against using a single function to wrap around
>
> find "${D}" -name '*.la' -delete
>
> it works pretty nicely also to avoid removing them for the eventual
> platforms needing them (that is, if Prefix is interested
On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 08:21:19 +0200
Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Okay so maybe I come out a bit too strong; on the other hand I do find
> it tremendously off-putting that people who have a vague idea of how
> the files are consumed get to tell me that they should be kept for
> the sake of it (or all
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06-10-2010 10:04, David Leverton wrote:
> On 6 October 2010 10:20, Luca Barbato wrote:
>> We discussed that to death, you are wrong abusing overlinking in your pet
>> project and what you were asking for is exactly the as-needed behaviour.
>
> Cle
On 6 October 2010 10:20, Luca Barbato wrote:
> We discussed that to death, you are wrong abusing overlinking in your pet
> project and what you were asking for is exactly the as-needed behaviour.
Clearly you have no clue what you're talking about here.
On 10/05/2010 10:20 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
as-needed fixes nothing. It works around some things, and introduces
some fairly icky problems as consequences. See the deleted comments on
Diego's blog posts for details.
We discussed that to death, you are wrong abusing overlinking in your
pet p
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 21:59:41 +0200
Luca Barbato wrote:
> > Great! It should be easy for you to fix it to only specify direct
> > link dependencies then, thus solving the underlying problem in one
> > place rather than working around it by fixing thousands of
> > individual packages.
>
> Sadly tha
On 10/5/10 4:33 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 13:49:43 +0200
Luca Barbato wrote:
Bluntly put, you seem to not know how libtool exactly works and
further down in the thread how linking exactly works. Please try to
learn the fine Gentoo docs on the subject and feel free to ask mo
On 5 October 2010 02:55, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> USE flags add complexity, and in real use cases there are near to no
> good reasons at all to keep .la files around.
That's why I initially suggested a variable rather than a USE flag, as
if it was implemented in a centralised function it would
On Tue, 05 Oct 2010 13:49:43 +0200
Luca Barbato wrote:
> Bluntly put, you seem to not know how libtool exactly works and
> further down in the thread how linking exactly works. Please try to
> learn the fine Gentoo docs on the subject and feel free to ask more
> details on irc.
Ah, so you do know
On 05-10-2010 13:49, Luca Barbato wrote:
> On 10/5/10 9:52 AM, Angelo Arrifano wrote:
>
>> By removing .la files, you are taking away that choice from the user.
>> For you they might be useless, for some user (or entire software house)
>> it can be its holly grail for library versioning and linkin
On 10/5/10 9:52 AM, Angelo Arrifano wrote:
By removing .la files, you are taking away that choice from the user.
For you they might be useless, for some user (or entire software house)
it can be its holly grail for library versioning and linking. I don't
really feel like forcing users to change
On 05-10-2010 03:55, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il giorno lun, 04/10/2010 alle 11.19 -0400, Richard Freeman ha scritto:
>>
>> That said, supporting this use case should not interfere with more
>> mainstream use of the distro. I like the USE flag proposal because it
>> lets us have our cake and ea
12 matches
Mail list logo
