Laurent Bigonville <[email protected]> writes: > diff --git a/checks/shared-libs b/checks/shared-libs > index 6fb812d..4ed36cf 100644 > --- a/checks/shared-libs > +++ b/checks/shared-libs > @@ -164,18 +164,23 @@ for my $cur_file (@{$info->sorted_index}) { > local $_; > open(LAFILE, "< unpacked/$cur_file") > or fail("Could not open unpacked/$cur_file for reading!"); > + tag "package-installs-la-file", $cur_file;
I disagree with this check. There are situations in which one has to ship a *.la file with the package (if, for example, the library is loaded via libltdl in a way that uses the features of the *.la file), and other cases where it's desirable (if, for example, the upstream documentation is full of references to the *.la files for loadable modules, as was the case for slapd). Even for regular libraries, I think this check is premature. We still have libraries that reference *.la files from other libraries, so just blindly removing *.la files can cause FTBFS problems. (I haven't looked in detail at the rest of your patch, but it looked reasonable at first glance.) -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
