On Sunday 09 November 2008, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 09-11-2008 18:04:05 +0200, Peter Alfredsen wrote:
> > +   # If this is a non-ELF system, chances are good that the .la
> > files will be needed. +     if type -P scanelf &> /dev/null
>
> I think this is a not so cool way to check for an ELF system.

Indeed, I think it's a horrid way. Please find a better one.

> > +   then
> > +           debug-print "Scanelf found, proceeding..."
> > +           ebegin "Removing useless .la files"
> > +           find "${TARGET}" -name '*.la' '(' -type l -o -type f ')' -exec
> > rm -f '{}' '+' +            eend 0
> > +   else
> > +           debug-print "scanelf not found, this appears to be a non-ELF
> > system." +          debug-print "non-ELF systems are likely to need .la
> > files." +           debug-print ".la files not removed from ${TARGET}"
>
> rationale?

"I've been told" that .la files are really only needed on non-ELF 
systems and with plugin systems that use dlopen. I actually have no way 
of knowing that the .la files are needed on those arches, but I had 
your archs in mind when doing the patch.

-- 
/PA

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply via email to