Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alistair Bush <ali_bush@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Removing .la files...
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 19:50:37
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Removing .la files... by "Wulf C. Krueger"
Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
> Hello! > > I think flameeyes should have sent this himself in the first place, but > since he's clearly not going to do that and prefers to just force it on > our users I'm mailing this... >
Have we not learn't! I hardly think that revdep-rebuild is an obvious solution to this issue. So now we have doomed our users ( and some of our dev's ) to having to search for a solution. I note that within the ebuild there isn't even a elog explaining what to do. If we are going to make changes like this we need to provide an effective "news service". I'm sure this was one of the issues that arose during the "hot house months". I actually find this incident rather depressing. especially after we (seem to) have done so well with the baselayout/openrc migration. ( I do realise that one is significantly bigger than the other and therefore requires a bigger "fan fair" ).
> flameeyes talked about .la files in his blog recently: > >
Im sure everyone will find that
> > Now he decided that simply removing them for several packages, resulting > in and its dupes. >
What a surprise. never could have guessed.
> This is annoying for quite a few users as they will have to rebuild lots > of stuff for KDE, Gnome and other packages and I'm not sure if this is > really the way we want to fix --as-needed failures.
++. We sure do like to annoy our users.
> > Furthermore, such things should not be decided and pushed through > unilaterally but be agreed upon here prior to doing this change. >
++. I actually have no problem with agreeing with it, currently my problem is the complete and utter lack of any _planned_ upgrade path. What do we think users are going to be saying at the end of the year when after every sync they have to revdep-rebuild. Maybe, if we proceed with this, we investigate what can have its la files removed and do it all in one go. therefore ppl won't have to rebuild kde/gnome ( or any other large and time consuming package) over and over and over and over and over and over ....... again. Hell it would even be better to "batch" a few conversions so that each revdep-rebuild fixes multiple breakages in one.
> Especially since even though removing .la files might make sense (with > exceptions, of course) we should think about either doing it > distribution-wide or not at all. >
++++++ -- gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Removing .la files... Luca Barbato <lu_zero@g.o>