Am Dienstag, den 18.12.2007, 18:12 -0600 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel: > IIRC "we have no choice" as Policy mandates static builds. May be a > 'recommends' though.
I'm not sure about that. I didn't see that on a quick read of chapters 8 and 10, though policy states in 10.2: > Packages that use libtool to create shared libraries should > include the .la files in the -dev package, unless the package > relies on libtool's libltdl library, in which case the .la > files must go in the run-time library package. So including the .la files was OK. The question I asked myself is whether we should compile the static libraries and/or (also) include the .la files. I have to do more reading on that one. > On 19 December 2007 at 00:43, Manuel Prinz wrote: > | If noone has complaints, I will apply it to trunk. > Always apply, we can always fix later. No point in sending patches. Done. > I'll try to build this later to see where I'm at w.r.t. my Rmpi breakage. > > Thanks for all your work, Dirk You're welcome! Besides that, I was the one who broke it in the first place. ;) Best regards Manuel
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil