| 1 |
On Thu, 2005-27-10 at 09:36 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thursday 27 October 2005 02:15, Luca Barbato wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Paul de Vrieze wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > In the case of embedded it is clear that what in binary distributions |
| 5 |
> > > is part of the development package (.la files, static libraries, |
| 6 |
> > > header files) is not desired at all. To break dependencies to only |
| 7 |
> > > strip away some of the headers seems to me a half solution that |
| 8 |
> > > breaks a lot and doesn't solve the problem either. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Btw embedded has already different way to archive the same result (ok, |
| 11 |
> > removing headers and static libs after isn't really the cleanest |
| 12 |
> > solution but works fine) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> The hardest part is probably to build all these packages as the finals |
| 15 |
> shouldn't have headers while the intermediates (used to build other |
| 16 |
> finals against) should. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Again, why not leave everything in the packages and use INSTALL_MASK on |
| 19 |
embedded systems ? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Olivier Crête |
| 23 |
tester@g.o |
| 24 |
x86 Security Liaison |
Archives