On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Carsten Haitzler <ras...@rasterman.com>wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Sep 2012 14:45:19 +0200 Andrea Suisani <sick...@opinioni.net> > said: > > > On 09/04/2012 02:40 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote: > > > I still wonder why these people install .la files, just remove them and > > > it's all fine > > > > to my understanding it's a libtool requirment, i.e. I need > > libgnutls.la to get elementary compiled. dunno why tough. :) > > it actually not required at all... unless you have an os that cant link > shared > libs with eachother or even do dynamic libs (.a's only). as such linux is > far > from being that os so you can safely delete all your .la files and > everything > will be fine. > Raster is completely right. These .la is for stupid systems. We don't support them, but it happens that people are insane and keep these cruft around. For gentoo packages I've created, I deleted them all... but it seems that some of the overlays do not do that anymore, unfortunately :-/ Our usage of pkg-config fulfills the needs of dependencies and finding all the libs. http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/10/libtool-archives-and-their-pointless-points http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2011/05/surviving-without-libtool-archives -- Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri http://profusion.mobi embedded systems -------------------------------------- MSN: barbi...@gmail.com Skype: gsbarbieri Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ enlightenment-users mailing list enlightenment-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-users
