From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 16 15:22:10 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B64E16A47B; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:22:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5896843D58; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:22:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 986053118; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:22:08 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 10:22:08 -0500 To: Mikhail Teterin Message-ID: <20060616152208.GA24948@soaustin.net> References: <200606112110.39148@aldan> <200606141616.21658.mi+mx@aldan.algebra.com> <200606160816.44477.lofi@freebsd.org> <200606161102.58509@aldan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200606161102.58509@aldan> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) Cc: Alexander Leidinger , Matthias Andree , Michael Nottebrock , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Mark Linimon Subject: Re: NOT installing the .la files X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:22:10 -0000 On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:02:57AM -0400, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > The consensus *was* that the .la files aren't needed. Either I missed the > discussion on their restoration on ports@ The consensus changed. As lofi has said, the .la files are needed by certain ports on the system. We used to try to keep them out of all the other ports that needed them -- but as dependencies changed, we wound up having to change those ports to either include them, or exclude them as extra. When the new libtool regime came in, aDe ditched the patching of libtool. >From discussions he and portmgr and others had at the time, we decided that it was simply easier to stop patching all these ports and include the files everywhere. A large number of plists have already been modified to reflect this. This is another one of those issues where we are never going to get 100% agreement, so portmgr is just going to have to make an edict that "the .la files stay in." (I would have liked to get all of the portmgrs to weigh in on this, which is why I have waited to step in here, but the several that did are all in agreement.) With nearly 15,000 ports, certain compromises have to be made to make the maintainance tasks easier, even if that costs some inodes. (The Ports Collection is not optimized to minimize inodes ATM anyway). This is one such compromise. As far as I am concerned, this needs to end the discussion so we can go back to working on the harder problems. mcl