On 28.10.2017 19:04, 大橋 洋平 wrote:
2017-10-29 1:48 GMT+09:00 Pierre Labastie <[email protected]>:
On 28/10/2017 17:24, DJ Lucas wrote:
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.
So is it OK to use the command we give in "Notes on Building Software"?
Or will I break my system if I do?
Here is the command:
-------------
find /lib /usr/lib -not -path "*Image*" -a -name \*.la -delete
-------------
I use a command (roughly) equivalent to that.
IIUC, I should at least remove *gst* paths and libltdl.la from the list
of deleted packages in addition to *Image*, but I am not sure.
I checked my system. All .la files in *gst* and libltdl.la were
removed, but my system works fine.
Please don't take the definition of "works fine" seriously, though.
Y. Ohashi
I second this. Gstreamer is sane and doesn't use libtool but dlopen
directly. Only ImageMagick and libgphoto2 rely on *.la files for their
modules (in subdirs of /usr/lib, not in /usr/lib).
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
