[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] prune_libtool_files is NOT a direct replacement for, example, find "${D}" -name '*.
From:       Michał Górny <mgorny () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2012-06-30 7:42:50
Message-ID: 20120630094250.4aa79f3d () pomiocik ! lan
[Download RAW message or body]


On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 23:18:56 +0200
Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:

> El jue, 28-06-2012 a las 10:26 +0200, Michał Górny escribió:
> > On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 22:12:34 +0300
> > Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > The logic in prune_libtool_files is not perfect[1].
> > 
> > Define 'perfect'.
> > 
> > > To clarify:
> > > 
> > > Use `prune_libtool_files --all` instead of plain
> > > `prune_libtool_files` if you don't test the package with the USE
> > > flags.
> > 
> > Sounds like abuse of '--all' to me. It's like calling 'rm -r' for
> > single file...
> > 
> > > [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/421197
> > 
> 
> But we will need to use "--all" in cases like pointed in that bug
> report, no? :/

You need to use it if the package passes '-module' to libtool,
and doesn't use plugin loader which uses .la files (ltdl, gmodule).

The main point is that installing _those_ .la files doesn't do any harm
to the system (they can't be linked against). Removing them may (for
example, in ImageMagick).

It's sad that people start running with pitchforks when they see
anything looking like .la without really understanding what it does.
And yes, I already had users removing all *.la files and then
complaining programs no longer work...

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]