On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 10:13:13PM -0600, Peter O'Gorman wrote: > Jean-Fran?ois Mertens wrote: > > On 12 Nov 2007, at 04:50, Jean-Fran?ois Mertens wrote: > > > this _ i.e., use this, so it would require pkg maintainers to edit > > correctly > > their .la files _ lost dream ... :) > > Well, it would be a pain, assuming nobody edited their .la files, but > many used the dead strip dylibs flag, the number of BuildDepends would > not be reduced, but the Depends: line could be reduced dramatically.
Does stripping down a package's Depends even help on the binary side either? The Depends' Depends would still be there, so the indirectly-linked libraries would still be needed and their -shlibs packages would still be indirect dependencies of the package. The main gain would be when a mid-level library stops using some low-level library as its back-end...high-level stuff wouldn't list the low-level lib, so these hidden changes wouldn't affect dependencies (build or run) of the high-level things. dan -- Daniel Macks [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.netspace.org/~dmacks ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Fink-devel mailing list Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net http://news.gmane.org/gmane.os.apple.fink.devel
