Hi Norm, On Wed, 2007-03-14 at 00:03 -0700, Norm Jacobs wrote: > I will grant you that libtool is horribly broken in so many ways, > but you may want to take some care in what you delete. You may > run across cases where .la files are actually required. > > Though we don't deliver ImageMagick with it's loadable module > support enabled right now, if/when we do, we will either have to > maintain a patch to get it to use .so files or deliver the .la > files for it's modules. You see ImageMagick uses lt_dlopen() > and friends with .la embedded in the module name that it's > loading.
Ouch. It's good to know, I've never seen anything using lt_dlopen. From the docs, it looks like lt_dlopen can open .so's as well as .la's and it has a variant called lt_dlopenext that tries .so instead of .la if it can't find .la. > I submitted a bug with some diffs to fix it several > months ago and was politely told "no thanks, we like what we have". I wonder if they would accept a patch that uses lt_dlopenext. If not, while I'm usually against patches that are not accepted upstream, this is a case where I think we should just patch ImageMagick to use good old dlopen instead. Laca > I suspect that there are other bits out there that this may be (or > become) some form of issue for as well. > > -Norm > > > The best way to fix .la files is deleting them. > > Everything works > > ine without them, in fact things work better. > > > > All these should go. Shall I file bugs? > > > > Laca > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > sfwnv-discuss mailing list > sfwnv-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/sfwnv-discuss
