1 |
On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 03:29:01PM +0200, Maciej Mrozowski wrote: |
2 |
> On Wednesday 26 of May 2010 19:27:43 Mike Frysinger wrote: |
3 |
> > On Wednesday 26 May 2010 05:38:00 Maciej Mrozowski wrote: |
4 |
> > > I've updated documentation, added example usage and option to keep |
5 |
> > > libtool files (ltdl.so supposedly needs those as I was told, no idea |
6 |
> > > what for). |
7 |
|
8 |
IMO, ltdl.so is probably just being silly. Perhaps these files contain |
9 |
information that is useful on non-Linux systems for dlopen()ing |
10 |
plugins. |
11 |
|
12 |
> > more applicable to us w/Linux is that static linking with libtool needs |
13 |
> > them. the AUTOTOOLS_KEEP_LA_FILES seems kind of spurious considering |
14 |
> > current tree behavior and assumption of gnu-capable linking systems. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> It is spurious when we forget about run-time dynamic linking (plugins) in some |
17 |
> apps. |
18 |
> libtool loader (ltdl.so) needs .la files unfortunately. One example - |
19 |
> imagemagick - removing .la files for coders makes 'convert' unable to locate |
20 |
> them (silly, but hey...). |
21 |
|
22 |
This case can be caught by checking if the .la file has the following in it: |
23 |
`` |
24 |
# Should we warn about portability when linking against -modules? |
25 |
shouldnotlink=yes |
26 |
'' |
27 |
|
28 |
If shouldnotlink=no _and_ the .la file in question is not libltdl.la |
29 |
itself, it is generally safe to remove. This is the current policy of |
30 |
the portage-multilib branch of the multilib overlay. libtool archive |
31 |
files which are safe to remove are removed by portage-multilib after |
32 |
the install phase. It seems to work well enough. |
33 |
|
34 |
Removing .la files which are useless on a given system would be very |
35 |
nice. It would be even more useful if unused .a files could be swept |
36 |
away at the same time :-). |
37 |
|
38 |
-- |
39 |
ohnobinki |
40 |
|
41 |
Look out for missing apostrophes! |