Re: [RFC] Removing .la files from x86

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Aug  2 22:09, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
> Libtool .la files are generally a waste of time and space.  They slow down
> linking of other libraries with libtool, and they cause otherwise
> unnecessary private dependencies to be pulled in by -devel packages.
> Therefore, the major distros generally remove them from their packages
> unless they are really necessary.
> 
> When we first enabled Cygwin for x86_64, as we had no backwards
> compatibility to worry about, I made removing all .la files the default.
> AFAIK this has worked well, and any missing link libraries that the presence
> thereof would have masked have already been fixed.
> 
> In order to do the same for x86 without breaking builds of other packages,
> AFAICS we would need a perpetual postinstall script which will continually
> remove them.  The downside is that (unless the script is made a *LOT* more
> complicated) a number of -devel packages will show up as "Incomplete" until
> such time they are rebuilt with a new version of cygport.
> 
> Any objections?

User confusion about incomplete packages?

What I wonder is, if cygport builds don't create/install .la files
anymore, don't we end up without them at one point anyway?  Isn't it
sufficient if they go away over time?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature