Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:33:29AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote: > > The existence of .la files is a bug. > > > > We already have a mechanism for recording dependencies between > > libraries; it's built into the ELF format, and does not require > > hardcoding any directories. Introducing .la files which override the > > existing mechanism and *do* hardcode directories is a regression. > > > > I don't buy the argument that "KDE won't build without them", or > > whatever it was you used to justify this. > I can't help it that you weren't paying attention.
My point is that the argument is bogus. I am positively certain that the root issue was not the absence of .la files; installing them merely served as a workaround for the actual problem, which was most likely related to ldconfig and / or LD_LIBRARY_PATH. This is like the (apocryphal) story of the car that wouldn't start on the way back from the store when the owner went to buy ice cream - but only if he bought vanilla. The correct fix is not to buy a different flavor. Once you realize that the vanilla ice cream is right next to the check-out register while the others are deeper within the store and therefore take considerably longer to get, you start looking for vapor lock. DES -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
