of the
> > > changelog must be accessible as `/usr/doc//changelog.gz' (this
> > > can be created by `lynx -dump -nolist').
>
> I have 3 seconds and no other discussion. Do we have a consensus? Speak up
> if you have a problem with the proposal.
I think i
d libraries will
generate `.la' files. If your package generates libtool libraries, i.e.
`.la' files, then you should include them in your library `-dev'
package or your run-time library package if it relies on libtool's
`libltdl' library.
*
HTH,
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Center for Distributed Object Computing, Washington University, St. Louis
58 60 1A E8 7A 66 F4 44 74 9F 3C D4 EF BF 35 88 1024/8A04D15D 1998/08/26
ssing this
ammendment until then? Sorry about the confusion and any inconvenience.
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Center for Distributed Object Computing, Washington University, St. Louis
58 60 1A E8 7A 66 F4 44 74 9F 3C D4 EF BF 35 88 1024/8A04D15D 1998/08/26
Hi,
On 9 May, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> On Sat, May 08, 1999 at 04:46:48PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote:
> > Description (from Joey Hess):
> > .la files aren't useless, libtool can use them and they are essential
> > to programs that use libltdl. Proposal is to
l libraries, i.e.
`.la' files, then you should include them in your library `-dev'
package.
-
Discussion Period: 2 weeks (from 8 May 1999 ending on 22 May 1999)
-
Disagreements: None so far. Some have expressed "concerns," however.
d.
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Center for Distributed Object Computing, Washington University, St. Louis
58 60 1A E8 7A 66 F4 44 74 9F 3C D4 EF BF 35 88 1024/8A04D15D 1998/08/26
cies which
cannot necessarily be derived after the .la file is deleted. Thomas can
probably explain this a lot better than I can, so I won't muddy the waters
with a poor example of my own.
-------
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Center for Distributed Obj
Hi,
On 7 May, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Thu, May 06, 1999 at 05:34:46PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote:
>
> > As such, installing the `.la' files in `-dev' packages seems like a good
> > idea, especially for static linking issues. Many developers do not
&g
mandating
> that everything use libtool.
Exactly.
BTW, let's not forget to Cc Gary these messages. He's not subscribed
to the list but he may be able to shed some light on some libtool
issues when time permits since he is one of the libtool team members.
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman &l
dependencies which
cannot necessarily be derived after the .la file is deleted. Thomas can
probably explain this a lot better than I can, so I won't muddy the waters
with a poor example of my own.
-
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Center for Distributed Object Computi
osal to this
mailing list enough?
Thanks,
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Center for Distributed Object Computing, Washington University, St. Louis
58 60 1A E8 7A 66 F4 44 74 9F 3C D4 EF BF 35 88 1024/8A04D15D 1998/08/26
windows
Note that these are types are not exclusive to their namesakes. For
example, libtool on HPUX uses its sunos versioning scheme,
libtool on Solaris uses the linux versioning scheme (interestingly
enough), etc.
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Center for Distributed Objec
; On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 12:56:06PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote:
> > Opinions? Would this be something we could add to our packing
> > policies?
>
> Just a simple question, how many packages (percentage guess) does this
> stand to _help_? Even if most libraries ar
libtool folks for more advantages. :)
> I'd like some concrete advantages be be found before we make this policy.
Indeed. That's very reasonable. I'll let you know what the libtool
folks say. Maybe I can get them to join this discussion.
-Ossama
--
Ossama Othman <[EMAIL PR
Hi Ben,
On 4 May, Ben Collins wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 12:56:06PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote:
> > Opinions? Would this be something we could add to our packing
> > policies?
>
> Just a simple question, how many packages (percentage guess) does this
> stand
Hi Marcelo,
On 4 May, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 02:15:31PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote:
>
> >* Reverted my "correction" of the libltdl* package name. The soname
> > of the libltdl libraries is currently 0.1.1, therefore th
elopers do not
include the `.la' files in the `-dev' packages. My proposal is to make
packages that use libtool to create shared libraries install the
generated `.la' files in corresponding `-dev' packages.
Opinions? Would this be something we could add to our packing
polici
Hi,
Please CC me since I am not on the list. Thanks!
On 30 Apr, James Mastros wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 07:00:09PM -0500, Ossama Othman wrote:
> > Just because potato is unstable doesn't mean that we should just upload
> > things to it whenever something new come
18 matches
Mail list logo
