On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello Russ,
>
> * Russ Allbery wrote on Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 01:20:28AM CET:
>> The most frequent problem caused by *.la files is that they add a pile of
>> unnecessary dependencies to shared libraries, which further enta
Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hello Russ,
> * Russ Allbery wrote on Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 01:20:28AM CET:
>> The most frequent problem caused by *.la files is that they add a pile
>> of unnecessary dependencies to shared libraries, which further
>> entangles package dependencies and
I'm using Gentoo. In the LDFLAGS, that my system is built with,
I have -Wl,--as-needed.
A few days ago, there was a release of libxcb and libX11,
that has done away with libxcb-xlib.
The problem is that this lib has injected its la file
to a lot of libX11 dependent la files. My question is:
was the
Hi Russ,
Russ Allbery wrote:
Ralf Wildenhues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hello Russ,
* Russ Allbery wrote on Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 01:20:28AM CET:
The most frequent problem caused by *.la files is that they add a pile
of unnecessary dependencies to shared libraries, which further
entangles pa
Peter,
I installed the same distro on a 32-bit Intel machine today and got the same
problem. So my hunch that this was a 64bit-only problem was wrong. To restate
the question . . . When only a libbfd.a is available for linking (i.e., no
libbfd.so), should libtool be smart enough to figure out
Roumen Petrov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Debian's experience to date is that --as-needed is buggy and breaks a
>> lot of software, and overall is not a particularly stable solution.
>> Removing *.la files so that the unneeded shared libraries aren't linked
>> in the first
