[EMAIL PROTECTED] committed: > Update of /cvsroot/fink/dists/10.3/unstable/main/finkinfo/graphics > > Added Files: > pfaedit.info > Log Message: > Added pfaedit from tracker item 902269 > > --- NEW FILE: pfaedit.info --- > Package: pfaedit [...] > InstallScript: << > make install prefix=%i > rm %i/lib/%n/libgdraw.la %i/lib/%n/libgdraw.dylib %i/lib/%n/libgunicode.la > %i/lib/%n/libgunicode.dylib ><< > Shlibs: << > %p/lib/%n/libgdraw.1.dylib 2.0.0 %n (>= 040301-1) > %p/lib/%n/libgunicode.2.dylib 3.0.0 %n (>= 040301-1) ><<
This looks out-of-compliance with the shared library policy. I see from the tracker what's going on, but it seems like this solution aims at contradictory purposes. Shifting .dylib files into lib/%n and not putting them into a -shlibs SplitOff isn't a bad solution for private shared libraries that aren't for public use (have no headers or published interface). But in that case, I don't think there should be a Shlibs field. But really, the package appears to use libtool (that's why there are .la) via a GNU configure script, so can't you just pass --enable-static=yes --enable-shared=no and get only static libs? That way they aren't needed at run-time and can be omitted from the fink package. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
