On 12 Nov 2007, at 05:27, Daniel Macks wrote:
> Does stripping down a package's Depends even help on the binary side
> either?
It does in the sense of giving (potentially) a smaller footprint to the
lib or executable
> The Depends' Depends would still be there, so the
> indirectly-linked libraries
On 12 Nov 2007, at 05:13, Peter O'Gorman wrote:
> 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,
There is a logical possibility they might be reduced too _ but I
have no
idea how t
On 11-Nov-07, at 10:27 PM, Daniel Macks wrote:
> 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 thin
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,
Jean-François Mertens wrote:
> On 12 Nov 2007, at 04:50, Jean-François 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 de
On 12 Nov 2007, at 04:50, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
> On 12 Nov 2007, at 04:27, Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 11, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>>
>>> I see in an excerpt of 'man ld' for 10.5 that ld
>>> now has an option '-dead_strip_dylibs'.
>>> I would strongly fav
On 12 Nov 2007, at 04:27, Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> On Nov 11, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
>
>> I see in an excerpt of 'man ld' for 10.5 that ld
>> now has an option '-dead_strip_dylibs'.
>> I would strongly favour adding this as a default
>> LDFLAG (conditional to 10.5).
>> It
On Nov 11, 2007, at 8:12 PM, Jean-François Mertens wrote:
I see in an excerpt of 'man ld' for 10.5 that ld
now has an option '-dead_strip_dylibs'.
I would strongly favour adding this as a default
LDFLAG (conditional to 10.5).
It does have the potential, when used systematically,
to substantiall
I see in an excerpt of 'man ld' for 10.5 that ld
now has an option '-dead_strip_dylibs'.
I would strongly favour adding this as a default
LDFLAG (conditional to 10.5).
It does have the potential, when used systematically,
to substantially reduce our deps ...
JF Mertens
---
