Rex Dieter wrote:
Dan Horák wrote:
> IMHO a working application is always preferred :-) But the plugin
> loading mechanism can be checked why it requires the *.la files.
The only time I've seen .la files really being needed was with KDE-3.
And that wasn't so much an issue that couldn't be solved as the KDE sig
wanting to put effort into KDE-4 rather than working on the deficincies
+1. The problematic .la files that should be avoided are those
associated with (linkable) shlibs. Plugin .la files are mostly harmless.
I thought Michael Schwendt pointed out times when plugin .la's would
cause issues as well. Is this chain of reasoning correct: Plugin .la
encodes need for library foo's .la. foo .la is packaged in the -devel
subpackage. Plugins now drag in the -devel package and its dep chain.