Re: [RFC] Removing .la files from x86

[Yaakov Selkowitz <yselkowitz@cygwin.com>]

On 2016-08-03 04:18, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> On 03/08/2016 10:00, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Aug  2 22:09, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote:
>>> Any objections?
>>
>> User confusion about incomplete packages?

That is my concern, although we are generally dealing with -devel 
packages here.  AFAICS the only way to work around that is to make the 
script much more complicated (and hence slower).

>> 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?

The problem with that approach is that it would have to be done in a 
top-down order, otherwise builds of other packages would break.  For 
example, libFLAC.la (from flac-devel) requires libogg.la (from 
libogg-devel).  If libogg.la is removed by rebuilding libogg with a new 
cygport but libFLAC.la is not, then any libtool-based packages which 
link with -lFLAC will fail because of the missing libogg.la mentioned 
therein.  Hence, the only way not to break things once they're there is 
to either remove them from the top-down (mass rebuild), or all at once 
(a perpetual postinstall).

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

I know. :-)  The modules that are kept on x86_64 would be left alone by 
the script.

-- 
Yaakov