On Oct 12, 2006, Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 05:01:03PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: >> On GNU/Linux, with the further constraint of not using static >> libraries, and only installing libraries in directories searched by >> both ld and ld.so, you don't lose or miss anything. > So you would lose on /opt and if some lib needs static linking, and > this decision is non-local as you properly explained in some other > part of this thread. E.g. we would globally remove degrees of freedom > for little gain. Right. Keeping the .la files for these rare cases makes a lot of sense to me. I get the impression they never occur in Fedora packages (I mean Core and Extras here, not packages *for* Fedora), so the Fedora policy might very well rule out .la files entirely, even if with a rationale explaining the assumptions behind it and recommendations about when to break this rule in third-party packages. -- 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
