On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 04:22:08PM -0500, Andrew Pimlott wrote: > On Mon, Dec 13, 1999 at 02:56:22PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > > <p> > > Packages that use libtool to create shared libraries must > > include the <em>.la</em> files in the <em>-dev</em> > > + packages, if it includes them at all. Dynamically loadable > > + modules that are created with libtool should not include > > + the .la file at all, since it is not needed. > > - packages, with the exception that if the package relies on > > - libtool's <em>libltdl</em> library, in which case the .la > > - files must go in the run-time library package. This is a > > - good idea in general, and especially for static linking > > - issues. > > </p> > > But it is my understanding that the library does not (usually) use > libltdl on itself, another application does. So the library cannot know > ahead of time whether someone will want to use the libltdl facility. > Considering also the fact that it's "a good idea in general", why not > just suck it up and up and always put the .la files in the library > package?
If the library is linked right, the .la serves no purpose for libltdl. -- -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------ / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
