David Pirotte da...@altosw.be writes:
Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 22:15:23 +0200,
Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at a écrit :
...
The solution (other than just removing the offending .la files) would be to
re-build and re-install all software depending on libgc-dev, including
g-wrap, as to get
Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 22:15:23 +0200,
Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at a écrit :
...
The solution (other than just removing the offending .la files) would be to
re-build and re-install all software depending on libgc-dev, including
g-wrap, as to get rid of the stale references to libgc's .la
Hello,
Andreas Rottmann a.rottm...@gmx.at skribis:
On the GNU system, there is (somewhat ironically) no real advantage of
having .la files that I know of
It’s needed at least when linking statically, because the .la file
contains dependency info not otherwise available (what pkg-config tries
Hello,
Thinking it was a libgc-dev debian package problem I posted a mail ... and got
the
following 2 answers [below].
Once I manually removed all *.la files from my /usr/local/lib tree, I could
further
try to compile guile-gnome-platform against gcc-4.6.
As the list of *.la files I removed
David Pirotte da...@altosw.be writes:
Hello,
Thinking it was a libgc-dev debian package problem I posted a mail ... and
got the
following 2 answers [below].
Once I manually removed all *.la files from my /usr/local/lib tree, I could
further
try to compile guile-gnome-platform against
