Hi,

Anfang der weitergeleiteten E-Mail:
======================================================================
Date Submitted:             2009-05-12 15:32 CEST
Last Modified:              2009-05-12 19:41 CEST
======================================================================
Summary: libgdk_pixbuf.la references non- existent .la files,
breaks graphviz builds
Description:
Building graphviz fails with:

/bin/bash ../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=link cc -g -version-info 6:0:0 -L/opt/csw/lib -o libgvplugin_gdk_pixbuf.la -rpath /opt/csw/lib/ graphviz
gvplugin_gdk_pixbuf.lo gvdevice_gdk_pixbuf.lo ../../lib/gvc/libgvc.la
-L/opt/csw/lib -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -lglib-2.0
-lintl
grep: /opt/csw/lib/libgmodule-2.0.la: No such file or directory



I believe this error is originating from: /opt/csw/lib/ libgmodule-2.0.la
which contains a reference to this non-existent file.  (Also to ls:
/opt/csw/lib/libgobject-2.0.la and /opt/csw/lib/libglib-2.0.la)


A more general question is: why are .la files being installed at all by
opencsw?
I don't understand all the rationale, but I note that Fedora does not
install any .la files.


======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(0006105) John Ellson (reporter) - 2009-05-12 16:13
http://opencsw.org/bugtrack/view.php?id=3666#c6105
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correction:

I believe the problem originates in the installed:
/opt/csw/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.la which references the non-existent files.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(0006106) dam (reporter) - 2009-05-12 16:34
http://opencsw.org/bugtrack/view.php?id=3666#c6106
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.la files were included in the past, but the current policy is to exclude
them:
<http://www.opencsw.org/standards/build>

New packages should take care to EXCLUDE libtool .la files. They are not helpful, and often create more problems than they solve. Unfortunately, existing packages may need to preserve them, until all dependant packages
have their own configs adjusted to not use .la files.

There is also a script which fixes Makefile to use linker directives
instead of .la files. The usage in GAR is documented at
<http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/gar/wiki/LibTool> Please ask on
maintainers@ for further advice if needed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(0006107) phil (manager) - 2009-05-12 18:58
http://opencsw.org/bugtrack/view.php?id=3666#c6107
----------------------------------------------------------------------
this is actually a bug in gmodule.
Please file a bug with THAT package, to repackage without .la files.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(0006108) John Ellson (reporter) - 2009-05-12 19:21
http://opencsw.org/bugtrack/view.php?id=3666#c6108
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This may *also* be a bug with gmodule, but *this* package is installing /opt/csw/lib/libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.la with broken references, so minimally it
needs to be repackaged without it.

I'll file a bug against glib for /opt/csw/lib/libgmodule.la

(I'm finding the .la files on the build8s host)

----------------------------------------------------------------------
(0006109) phil (manager) - 2009-05-12 19:41
http://opencsw.org/bugtrack/view.php?id=3666#c6109
----------------------------------------------------------------------
since the offending package is mine, please feel free to repackage and take
over glib.

I have made an updated glib 1.2.10 package with the latest package
structure (license/, no static libs, no .la) in testing/:

 glib-1.2.10,REV=2009.05.13-SunOS5.8-i386-CSW.pkg.gz
 glib-1.2.10,REV=2009.05.13-SunOS5.8-sparc-CSW.pkg.gz

The latest 1.x.y library, 1.3.15, builds a different shared library,
whereas all the dependent packages rely on
 /opt/csw/lib/libglib-1.2.so.0

I guess it wouldn't make sense to recompile them against a newer 1.x
version?


Best regards

 -- Dago
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers

Reply via email to