On Oct 6, 2006, Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On Oct 5, 2006, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> So? That's not a problem with the mentioned patch. >> Ignoring dependency_libs would break the following case: >> - libA.la, static only... > 2. Good thing we don't package static libs (or at least *strongly* > discouraged). This is too narrow a vision. Fedora is a major development platform for packages that ship libtool-using packages for many different platforms. If we break libtool such that it still works for us, but won't work for others, people who develop their packages on Fedora will think libtool will get them the portability they expect, but it won't because Fedora broke the portability. Thinking of Fedora-only changes for libtool is completely missing the point about how libtool is used. -- 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
