| 1 |
David Leverton a écrit : |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Not for library consumers that use libtool but not pkgconfig. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I'd be in favor of having a _default_ configuration for Gentoo where |
| 6 |
static binaries are never built except for some key packages (mainly for |
| 7 |
rescue situations). |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
That way, in a dynamic-lib only system, libtool will expand -l<name> to |
| 10 |
<name>.so. Simple and easy. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
As Diego and others have been on a crusade to make sure that system libs |
| 13 |
are used instead of bundled libs, static libs should also be outcast. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> Why only plugins? What's to stop an application from loading a "normal" |
| 16 |
> library using libtool's dlopen wrapper (perhaps so it can fail gracefully if |
| 17 |
> the library is missing, for example)? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Nothing per se, but I have yet to see any FOSS application dlopen() gtk+ |
| 20 |
or libpng. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
*None* of the binary distros out there ship .la files by default. Those |
| 23 |
come with -devel packages. Proof that they are (almost) never needed. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
And if an application chooses to dlopen() gtk+ or libpng, the ELF |
| 26 |
headers contain all the dependencies, so the actual content of the .la |
| 27 |
file is also useless in that case. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Cheers :) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Rémi |
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives