Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
Martijn van Oosterhout skrev: Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but pkg-config is recursing through modules even for dynamic linking which is wrong. Now either pkg-config of the gtk+2 pc file needs to be fixed, then you can start recompiling all the affected programs... The gtk+2 .pc file needs to be changed to mark a bunch of those Requires as Requires.private, pkg-config provides all the necessary infrastructure now. (If not, please do file bugs.) - tfheen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On 9/28/06, Tollef Fog Heen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Martijn van Oosterhout skrev: Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but pkg-config is recursing through modules even for dynamic linking which is wrong. Now either pkg-config of the gtk+2 pc file needs to be fixed, then you can start recompiling all the affected programs... The gtk+2 .pc file needs to be changed to mark a bunch of those Requires as Requires.private, pkg-config provides all the necessary infrastructure now. (If not, please do file bugs.) Ok, the reduces the libs list, but it also reduces the cflags list. So much so that you can't actually compile anything gtk-related. It'd be nice if there was a way to specify package that should be included for the purposes cflags, but excluded for the libs. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 04:17:39PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: The gtk+2 .pc file needs to be changed to mark a bunch of those Requires as Requires.private, pkg-config provides all the necessary infrastructure now. (If not, please do file bugs.) Ok, the reduces the libs list, but it also reduces the cflags list. So much so that you can't actually compile anything gtk-related. Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but pkg-config is recursing through modules even for dynamic linking which is wrong. Now either pkg-config of the gtk+2 pc file needs to be fixed, then you can start recompiling all the affected programs... The gtk+2 .pc file needs to be changed to mark a bunch of those Requires as Requires.private, pkg-config provides all the necessary infrastructure now. (If not, please do file bugs.) Patching of gtk+-2.0.pc and friends is on the TODO, but will be implemented in the 2.10.x series, not in 2.8. pango*.pc would have been my guinea pigs, but I'm not sure it's worth the risk so close to release now. Thanks for the reminder! -- Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 Well, then something wierd is going on. I have 0.21-1 installed and I get this. This first time is with Requires, the second is with Requires.private. My understanding is that the results should be the same? vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# dpkg -l pkg-config snip ii pkg-config 0.21-1 manage compile and link flags for libraries vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 -DXTHREADS -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libpng12 vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# joe gtk+-2.0.pc editted Requires to Requires.private File gtk+-2.0.pc saved. vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo -- Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:20:18PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 Well, then something wierd is going on. I have 0.21-1 installed and I get this. This first time is with Requires, the second is with Requires.private. My understanding is that the results should be the same? vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# dpkg -l pkg-config snip ii pkg-config 0.21-1 manage compile and link flags for libraries vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 -DXTHREADS -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/X11R6/include -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libpng12 vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# joe gtk+-2.0.pc editted Requires to Requires.private File gtk+-2.0.pc saved. vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo I don't know what pkg-config is supposed to do, but surely you don't need the freetype2 nor the pango, nor the X11 includes files to build gtk applications. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On 9/28/06, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo I don't know what pkg-config is supposed to do, but surely you don't need the freetype2 nor the pango, nor the X11 includes files to build gtk applications. Have you tried? Try a simple #include gtk/gtk.h and you get errors like this: In file included from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdkcolor.h:31, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdkcairo.h:23, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdk.h:30, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk/gtk.h:31, from gtktest.c:10: /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdktypes.h:33:25: error: pango/pango.h: No such file or directory In file included from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdk.h:30, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk/gtk.h:31, from gtktest.c:10: /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdkcairo.h:25:30: error: pango/pangocairo.h: No such file or directory If you add /usr/include/pango-1.0 it works. Perhaps Requires.private is not recursive? It's not mentioned in the manpage, but I would've expected the there to be no difference between Requires and Requires.private when looking at cflags. At least, that's my interpretation of this thread. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:20:18PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: On 9/28/06, Kurt Roeckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version of pkg-config. Please see http://bugs.debian.org/340904 Well, then something wierd is going on. I have 0.21-1 installed and I get this. This first time is with Requires, the second is with Requires.private. My understanding is that the results should be the same? Afaik, they should, so I suggest you file a bug. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Thu, Sep 28, 2006 at 10:40:43PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/28/06, Mike Hommey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vali:/usr/lib/pkgconfig# pkg-config --cflags gtk+-2.0 -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 -I/usr/include/cairo I don't know what pkg-config is supposed to do, but surely you don't need the freetype2 nor the pango, nor the X11 includes files to build gtk applications. Have you tried? Try a simple #include gtk/gtk.h and you get errors like this: In file included from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdkcolor.h:31, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdkcairo.h:23, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdk.h:30, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk/gtk.h:31, from gtktest.c:10: /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdktypes.h:33:25: error: pango/pango.h: No such file or directory In file included from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdk.h:30, from /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gtk/gtk.h:31, from gtktest.c:10: /usr/include/gtk-2.0/gdk/gdkcairo.h:25:30: error: pango/pangocairo.h: No such file or directory If you add /usr/include/pango-1.0 it works. Oh my... Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
Am Donnerstag 28 September 2006 21:14 schrieb Kurt Roeckx: Note that Requires.private is used for cflags since the last version of pkg-config. Interesting but maybe documenting Requires.private would be a good idea? Hint: the manpage only mentions Libs.private, see #341977 #346602. And 9 months is quite some time :-/ How shall I convince upstream to do it right if pkg-config upstream does not document it? Fixing it only in Debian does not quite convince upstream... HS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
Christian Aichinger wrote:
As a start, I've written a script that searches for unnecessary
dependencies and reports them. Results are available here:
http://rerun.lefant.net/checklib
More detailed information about the meaning of the results are
available on the web page, the two most important points are
problems and errors.
A problem means that the package has useless dependencies on
library packages. This causes the kind of trouble outlined above and
should be fixed. A HOWTO is here:
http://rerun.lefant.net/checklib/howto-fix-problems.html
In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs
available on the web page for problems and found the libraries that
are most often listed as bogus dependencies. Here are the top twenty
offenders, listed with the number of packages that (according to
checklib) have each as an unnecessary dependency:
1663: libxext6
1275: libxi6
1196: zlib1g
1174: libx11-6
949: libice6
948: libsm6
940: libfontconfig1
923: libxrender1
918: libxinerama1
918: libxcursor1
905: libxrandr2
697: libatk1.0-0
688: libcairo2
636: libgcc1
610: libxfixes3
536: libpango1.0-0
480: libpng12-0
424: libfreetype6
394: libart-2.0-2
386: libxml2
Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la and .pc
files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they link in.
I used the attached (fairly trivial) script to scan through the log
files. It is pretty dependent on the exact file format of the logs, though.
regards,
--
Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Physics Department
WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/Princeton University
GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544
#!/bin/sh
if [ $1 = download ] ; then
wget -r --level=1 'http://rerun.lefant.net/checklib/status.PROBLEM.html'
fi
rm -f reverse-deps.txt
touch reverse-deps.txt
for file in rerun.lefant.net/checklib/log.*.html ; do
for lib in `grep -B 1 '^RESULT: PROBLEMS' $file | head -n 1 | tr -d ,` ; do
line=`grep '[:] '$lib'$' reverse-deps.txt`
if [ -n $line ] ; then
n=`echo $line | awk '{print $1}' | tr -d ':'`
n2=$(( $n + 1 ))
sed -i 's/^'$n'\(: '$lib'\)$/'$n2'\1'/ reverse-deps.txt
else
echo '1: '$lib reverse-deps.txt
fi
done
done
sort -n reverse-deps.txt tmp
mv -f tmp reverse-deps.txt
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: KBM Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la KBM and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they KBM link in. Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? -- JID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
Mikhail Gusarov wrote: You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: KBM Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la KBM and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they KBM link in. Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? I asked myself the very same question a few weeks ago, but someone said that too much black magic is involved with this parameter -- whatever this means. The main problem seems to be, that relibtoolizing seems to be too complicated and error prone so many developers just skip this part. So I think we need an easy (automatic) solution in order to get rid of this problem once and for all. Cheers, Bastian -- Bastian Venthur http://venthur.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
Mikhail Gusarov wrote: You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: KBM Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la KBM and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they KBM link in. Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? In many cases, yes, but there may be some breakage. I'm by no means a binutils expert, but following are the caveats I'm aware of. A little before the release of Sarge, there was a discussion about whether to do this by default: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/04/msg2.html There is some concern that ld may strip away libraries that provide constructors and destructors using this option. See Gabor's emails in the old thread: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/04/msg2.html and in this thread: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/09/msg00908.html There is also concern that some libraries do *not* link against other libraries they need, leaving it up to the end program to link them in. Suppose libA.so uses symbols from libB.so, but doesn't link it. (This is arguably broken, but it happens. But IMO a bug should be filed on such libraries.) Someone then writes program C, which uses symbols only from libA.so, not from libB.so. Nevertheless, linking program C requires -lA -lB. I think --as-needed will break in those cases. Further, --as-needed doesn't work when creating shared libraries (at least it didn't at the time I experimented with it; instead it stripped out *all* NEEDED entries from the .so file!) so it won't help with those cases of unnecessary dependencies. Finally, if you use --as-needed in a Debian package, you'll want to have a versioned Build-Depends on binutils (= 2.16.1cvs20050902-1) to ensure you avoid http://bugs.debian.org/320697 . regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 11:41:33PM +0700, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: KBM Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la KBM and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they KBM link in. Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? --as-needed basicly does the same as checklib. They both might say that some library isn't needed while it actually is. It might work in most cases, but it might break in others. The best solution is to avoid telling the linker it should be linking to that library, but that might be hard in some cases. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs available on the web page for problems and found the libraries that are most often listed as bogus dependencies. Here are the top twenty offenders, listed with the number of packages that (according to checklib) have each as an unnecessary dependency: 1663: libxext6 out of 2061 packages that have a Depends on it on unstable/amd64, so that's about 80% 1275: libxi6 out of 1393: 91% 1196: zlib1g out of 1796: 66% 1174: libx11-6 out of 2502: 47% 949: libice6 out of 983: 96% 948: libsm6 out of 976: 97% 940: libfontconfig1 out of 1136: 82% 923: libxrender1 out of 1071: 86% 918: libxinerama1 out of 1093: 84% 918: libxcursor1 out of 1053: 87% 905: libxrandr2 out of 1049: 86% 697: libatk1.0-0 out of 850: 82% 688: libcairo2 out of 865: 79% 636: libgcc1 out of 2277: 28% 610: libxfixes3 out of 653: 93% 536: libpango1.0-0 out of 881: 71% 480: libpng12-0 out of 753: 64% 424: libfreetype6 out of 596: 71% 394: libart-2.0-2 out of 444: 89% 386: libxml2 out of 790: 49% Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs available on the web page for problems and found the libraries that are most often listed as bogus dependencies. This seriously rocks. Thanks. Actually that should be terribly easy to get this out of the DB checklib uses, but it isn't, mostly due to lazyness on my side. Might I include your script in checklib (under GPLv2+, if possible), and put the results on a seperate page on rerun.lefant.net/checklib? Cheers, Christian Aichinger signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 11:41:33PM +0700, Mikhail Gusarov wrote: Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? As described in the other mails, --as-needed is a hack, and can cause trouble. I've also thought of a debhelper script stipping out useless NEEDED entries, but that suffers from the same problems as --as-needed (mostly related to init/fini functions). On IRC the idea came up to include such checks in piuparts, however I haven't yet investigated how this would fit with its architecture (conceptionally it should be the right place, though). It's really quite sad that we can't easily automate such checks during package build, as that would be the easiest way to get rid of all the dependencies. Cheers, Christian Aichinger signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
Christian Aichinger wrote: On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:36:08AM -0700, Kevin B. McCarty wrote: In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs available on the web page for problems and found the libraries that are most often listed as bogus dependencies. This seriously rocks. Thanks. Actually that should be terribly easy to get this out of the DB checklib uses, but it isn't, mostly due to lazyness on my side. Might I include your script in checklib (under GPLv2+, if possible), and put the results on a seperate page on rerun.lefant.net/checklib? Yes, sure! You'll probably want to make serious improvements to it since it was just something I whipped out very quickly. I hereby license the script under the MIT license, to wit: Copyright (c) 2006 Kevin B. McCarty Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the Software), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions: The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED AS IS, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE. (This is of course GPL-compatible :-) Is there any chance you could also have it output the percentage of dependencies on each library which are unnecessary (as Kurt did in http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/09/msg00940.html )? best regards, -- Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On 9/26/06, Mikhail Gusarov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: KBM Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la KBM and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they KBM link in. Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? Some of it is also pkg-config's fault. For example, anyone using pkg-config with gtk+2 gets the following: # pkg-config --libs gtk+-2.0 -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -lXrandr -lXi -lXinerama -lXext -latk-1.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lm -lpangocairo-1.0 -lfontconfig -lXcursor -lpango-1.0 -lcairo -lXrender -lX11 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lglib-2.0 Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but pkg-config is recursing through modules even for dynamic linking which is wrong. Now either pkg-config of the gtk+2 pc file needs to be fixed, then you can start recompiling all the affected programs... Some of the discussion in bug #340904 is relevent here. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://svana.org/kleptog/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
* Kevin B. McCarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] [060926 18:37]: Most of these are X-related, suggesting that quite a lot of .la and .pc files are pretty indiscriminate about which X libs they link in. There is also AC_PATH_XTRA, which just adds all X stuff when only few may be needed. Also note that Xt libs (Xt, Xaw, Xaw3d) sometimes have funny effects as the order they are linked against can make a difference sometimes. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
Le mardi 26 septembre 2006 à 09:36 -0700, Kevin B. McCarty a écrit : In case it's of interest to anyone, I went through the checklib logs available on the web page for problems and found the libraries that are most often listed as bogus dependencies. Here are the top twenty offenders, listed with the number of packages that (according to checklib) have each as an unnecessary dependency: [lots of X libraries] For those interested in reducing such dependencies, the GNOME team is using Mike Hommey's hack to strip indirect dependencies from .la files: for file in $(wildcard debian/$(cdbs_curpkg)/usr/lib/*.la); do \ sed -i /dependency_libs/ s/'.*'/''/ $$file ; \ done Currently this is mostly done for experimental GNOME 2.16 packages, but it has dramatically cut off some dependencies. It also helps building a path towards complete removal of .la files, which we hope to achieve for GNOME packages in etch+1. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette/\./\ : :' : [EMAIL PROTECTED] `. `'[EMAIL PROTECTED] `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 09:23:23PM +0200, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: Will this problem disappear if end programs will pass --as-needed flag to the ld command line? Some of it is also pkg-config's fault. For example, anyone using pkg-config with gtk+2 gets the following: # pkg-config --libs gtk+-2.0 -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -lXrandr -lXi -lXinerama -lXext -latk-1.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lm -lpangocairo-1.0 -lfontconfig -lXcursor -lpango-1.0 -lcairo -lXrender -lX11 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -ldl -lglib-2.0 Which is all crap. Yes, this is the list you need for static, but gtk1.2 also seems to be noisy; at least two of my packages (libstroke, mtrack) pick up a ton of apparently unneeded deps from gtk-config; [8:48am] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:ham/mtrack/mtrack-0.3 pkg-config gtk --libs -rdynamic -L/usr/lib -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lgtk -lgdk -lgmodule -lglib -ldl -lXi -lXext -lX11 -lm The pkg-config results are the same: [8:48am] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:ham/mtrack/mtrack-0.3 gtk-config --libs -L/usr/lib -L/usr/X11R6/lib -lgtk -lgdk -rdynamic -lgmodule -lglib -ldl -lXi -lXext -lX11 -lm checklib reports that libdl, libXi, libXext and libX11 all become unnecessary dependencies of the mtrack package as a result. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3SB [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Top 20 unnecessary dependencies [was: Re: A plan to get rid of unnecessary package dependencies]
On Tue, Sep 26, 2006, Josselin Mouette wrote: for file in $(wildcard debian/$(cdbs_curpkg)/usr/lib/*.la); do \ sed -i /dependency_libs/ s/'.*'/''/ $$file ; \ done To use this feature, if you use CDBS, simply: include /usr/share/gnome-pkg-tools/1/rules/clean-la.mk and build-dep on gnome-pkg-tools = 0.7. I'm using it as follow in my non-CDBS packages: sed -i /dependency_libs/ s/'.*'/''/ debian/$(DEV_PKG)/usr/lib/*.la -- Loïc Minier [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
