On 10/03/2010 07:53 AM, David Leverton wrote: > Would it be too much trouble to have a standardised variable that > means .la files should be kept? It maybe /shouldn't/ be exposed as a > USE flag because very few people will need it, but if it's easy to > implement (maybe by having an eutils function to do the removal, > checking the variable first) it would remove any objections I could > imagine.
Such a solution would also have the virtue of allowing the use of USE dependencies. So, you would only install the .la files from a particular library if another package actually needed them. Packages could also have USE defaults as seems logical to their maintainers and distro policy. Where this would get complex is if we want more than all-or-nothing resolution. The simplest USE approach would be to have it toggle all the .la files in the package. However, if you have 5 files that are essential, and 5 that are likely nothing but trouble it will be harder to manage that while still allowing full control. I guess careful use of local flags might work, in combination with some sane policy. I'm not sure if this is a use case that is even worth worrying about... Rich
