On Sun, 06.01.13 10:46, Bryan Kadzban (br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net) wrote: > > Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > ]] Tom Gundersen > > > >> This was what the old nss-myhostname did. Lennart: any good reason > >> to exclude the .la or should nss-myhostname be treated the same as > >> the other libs? > > > > .la files are only useful for static linking. > > Untrue. They're perfectly useful for dynamic linking as well: > > http://www.sourceware.org/autobook/autobook/autobook_68.html#SEC68 > > Second paragraph. Also the page several sections after this one, about > installing a shared library with libtool. > > > (I hold that static linking in general is a bad idea and .la files > > should just go away entirely on Linux, but this is not a universally > > held opinion.) > > No, because that opinion would defeat the whole purpose of libtool, > which is to have a single interface (in terms of commands that get run) > that's portable both across Unix-like OSes, and across shared vs. static > libraries by adding one flag. > > On Linux the .la files are probably not necessary for shared libs, no -- > but using libtool to find them still is, if the code ever expects to > compile on another system. And not everyone has the systemd "all the > world is Linux" viewpoint; some projects can't afford to be that > fragmentary toward other Unix implementations.
For systemd all the world is Linux, so there's really no point in keeping any .la files around. systemd is not portable to non-Linux. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
