I think this came up on IRC a week or two ago. Debian's policy, which makes sense to me, is that the .la files belong with the headers *unless* the package relies on libtool's libltdl library (which needs them at runtime); in the latter case, you put the .la files along with the shared libs in the -shlibs package. (I don't know what you are supposed to do if the library ever gets updated, however, since the .la files don't have version numbers.)
-- Dave "Peter O'Gorman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > From a report on -users, I realized that g-wrap needs to have it's > .la's around so that the modules may be loaded into the guile > interpreter. Currently there are 3 packages g-wrap, g-wrap-dev and > g-wrap-shlibs. > > Now I could rewrite the splitoffs and move the .la's into > g-wrap-shlibs, or I could make gnucash Depend on g-wrap-dev (ugh), > or.... > > Any suggestions? > > Peter > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Etnus, makers of TotalView, The debugger for complex code. Debugging C/C++ programs can leave you feeling lost and disoriented. TotalView can help you find your way. Available on major UNIX and Linux platforms. Try it free. www.etnus.com _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
