On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 22:05 +0100, Lionel Le Folgoc wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 02:13:29PM -0600, Chanoch (Ken) Bloom wrote: > > I can certainly apply either method of fixing liblink-grammar4-dev > > (either removing dependency_libs, deleting /usr/lib/*.la, or adding a > > dependency on libaspell-dev), but I'm don't know what the consequences > > of any of these methods would be, or what could break. > > > > Could you advise me what I need to test to ensure that references to > > /usr/lib/libaspell.la are unnecesary? > > > > Thanks > > --Ken Bloom > > > > -- > > Chanoch (Ken) Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory. > > Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology. > > http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/ > > The reverse-build-depends could break, in theory (but Debian tries to > get rid of these .la files, so it shouldn't -- even gtk+ maintainers > have dropped their .la files). > > I've rebuilt abiword twice (once with empty dependency_libs, and once > without the .la file), and it built successfully each time. So it should > be fine, since abiword is apparently the only reverse-build-depends of > liblink-grammar4-dev. > > (I'm not a library expert, but this is what I could gather from > <http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/LAFileRemoval>, > <http://ftp-master.debian.org/~aba/la/current.txt> and > <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00808.html>)
In that case, I'll eliminate the .la file completely, test rebuilding AbiWord against the new version of liblink-grammar4-dev and running it, and beyond that I'll assume things work unless I get another bug report. --Ken -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
