On 2012-01-23 21:04 +0100, Craig Small wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 11:09:59PM +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
>> It has certainly helped, but libncurses5 has still ~500 reverse
>> dependencies in unstable. I'm eagerly awaiting "-Wl,--as-needed" to be
>> added to the default LDFLAGS…
> Of those 500, a fair proportion would need libnucrses. I believe procps
> does and it needs both versions of libncurses dev packages.
It would need some adoptions in the build system to link all programs in
the procps suite against ncursesw, I guess.
> There's no automatic way of working out if a package needs libtinfo
> rather than libncurses?
Build the package and look for dpkg-shlibdeps warnings:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: dependency on libncurses.so.5 could be avoided
if "/path/to/source/debian/foo/usr/bin/bar" were not uselessly linked
against it (they use none of its symbols).
If the same warning pops up for libtinfo.so.5, the binary should not be
linked against a curses or termlib library. If there is no such warning
for libtinfo.so.5, then the binary could be linked against tinfo rather
than ncurses.
Cheers,
Sven
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
