On Oct 2, 2006, Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> - If -la was needed for building libb, then there exists a real >> dependency between liba and libb and libb.la is correct about that. > No, this dependency does not need to be handled explicitly with dynamic > libraries. And it's actually harmful if you move the .so link to the -devel package, which is the general recommendation. Consider that foo-devel provides libfoo.so, which is a link to libfoo.so.0 provided by foo-libs. Consider that libfoo.so.0 depends on libbar.so.0, provided by bar-libs. If you link with -lfoo without libtool, it just works. If you link with -lfoo with libtool, and libtool finds the .la file that lists -lbar as a dependency of libfoo.la, then you lose unless you list bar-devel as a dependency of foo-devel. Is the absence of such an otherwise-unnecessary dependency a bug in package foo? -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Secretary for FSF Latin America http://www.fsfla.org/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org} -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
