>On October 28, 2017 10:08:53 AM CDT, "大橋 洋平" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > Doesn't LFS advise removal of .la files nowadays? I seem to recall
>>> > something was documented.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately I do not think that works well.  Every autotools
>>package
>>> installs .la files and libtool insists on using them.  It would be
>>nice
>>> if libtool would just use pkgconfig.
>>
>>I've always deleted .la files and have no problems so far. Would you
>>tell me why don't you "think that works well"?
>>
>>
>>Y. Ohashi
>>--
>>http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
>>FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
>>Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>
>The difference is that it must be done after each package is installed,
>making it somewhat error prone. Once another libtool based package uses
>a previous one, the linker is forever dependent on it and the dependency
>chain just gets longer and longer. Making it more difficult to correct.

Thank you for your reply.
Since I always run `make install` via my custom wrapper script which
automatically removes .la files after install, I guess it's no problem
for me.


Y. Ohashi
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to