On Oct 13, 2006, Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz(a)informatik.tu-chemnitz.de> wrote:
aoliva(a)redhat.com (Alexandre Oliva) writes:
>> no; 'libbar.la' might be used by a 'libbaz.la' loadable module
which
>> is added to the repository a year later by a different maintainer.
>
> Not if libbar.la was not installed.
So you suggest to avoid packaging of .la files?
I understand that was the proposal on the table, and I don't see
reasons against that given the constraints exposed so far. It's not
my suggestion, and I wouldn't say I actively promote it, but I don't
mind it, and I did mind arguments that were brought up against it, so
I voiced my opinion against the arguments ;-)
--
Alexandre Oliva
http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Secretary for FSF Latin America
http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva(a){redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva(a){lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}