Re: [RFC] Removing .la files from x86

[Marco Atzeri <marco.atzeri@gmail.com>]

On 03/08/2016 10:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug  2 22:09, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>> Libtool .la files are generally a waste of time and space.  They slow down
>> linking of other libraries with libtool, and they cause otherwise
>> unnecessary private dependencies to be pulled in by -devel packages.
>> Therefore, the major distros generally remove them from their packages
>> unless they are really necessary.
>>
>> When we first enabled Cygwin for x86_64, as we had no backwards
>> compatibility to worry about, I made removing all .la files the default.
>> AFAIK this has worked well, and any missing link libraries that the presence
>> thereof would have masked have already been fixed.
>>
>> In order to do the same for x86 without breaking builds of other packages,
>> AFAICS we would need a perpetual postinstall script which will continually
>> remove them.  The downside is that (unless the script is made a *LOT* more
>> complicated) a number of -devel packages will show up as "Incomplete" until
>> such time they are rebuilt with a new version of cygport.
>>
>> Any objections?
>
> User confusion about incomplete packages?
>
> What I wonder is, if cygport builds don't create/install .la files
> anymore, don't we end up without them at one point anyway?  Isn't it
> sufficient if they go away over time?
>
>
> Corinna

I prefer just the change in cygport behaviour.

Please note we have still some *.la files on x86_64
for other reasons and we can not run an indiscriminate prune
on x86.

  $ ls -1 /usr/lib/*.la
/usr/lib/libguilereadline-v-17.la
/usr/lib/libguilereadline-v-18.la
/usr/lib/libguile-srfi-srfi-13-14-v-3.la
/usr/lib/libguile-srfi-srfi-1-v-3.la
/usr/lib/libguile-srfi-srfi-4-v-3.la
/usr/lib/libguile-srfi-srfi-60-v-2.la
/usr/lib/libltdl.la
/usr/lib/libntl.la

Regards
Marco