On Thu, 18 Jan 2007 02:04:47 +0100, Axel Thimm wrote: > No, I don't favour "bloat"ing, you often seem to assume strange things > about people you communicate with. It's just you, Axel. It's triggered by your strange replies. ;) I try to explain the problem to you and in return only get something like "Yes, that's what *-devel packages are about" which tells me you are not serious. > > > > It results in pretty much the opposite of trying to eliminate > > > > superfluous and redundant BR. You will find that packagers will > > > > be confronted again and again with missing BR which are only > > > > needed because of direct dependencies between .la files or > > > > changes within the libtool dep-chain. > > > > > > And? One BR perhaps (!) too much for one *.la file. > > > > They are _wrong_ BR and wrong R even if you insist on barking up the tree > > to get leaf packagers to add the bloat in their packages before you would > > be able to rebuild your package fine without starting to use ugly work-arounds. > > The ugly workarounds are what we're doing with selectively nuking *.la > files depening on the wind direction. Patches to untangle build and > runtime dependencies from libtools are already available and used by > other distribuitions and upstream authors are more than willing to > understand what your issues are and fix it in libtool proper, so > please put the efforts there instead of rebreaking the distro on every > single kde change. Not to mention that kde is just one user of the > runtime *.la there may be others now and in the future. As much as I support upstream changes, it is beyond my motivation to be the one to take the lead here. I have not even seen any solutions other than killing .la files except where the used ltdl doesn't understand .so files. Btw, see e.g. KDE's missing response: http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=93359 Very disappointing. > Let's not waste ourselves on ugly workarounds and keep *.la files > until libtool does better. The few "bloated" build dependencies that > force our build servers to waste ten seconds more per package build > are not really worth it. And again: There are patches fixing most of > it already, even tested in the field by other distros since *years*. Once more, the bloat also affects the linking and hence the *binary* dependencies. -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
