[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Help-smalltalk] Questions on GNU Smalltalk packaging
From: |
Mike Anderson |
Subject: |
Re: [Help-smalltalk] Questions on GNU Smalltalk packaging |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:22:41 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061025) |
Stephen Compall wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 21:54 +0000, Mike Anderson wrote:
>> ...but the dynamic loading mechanism can load .so libraries as well - it
>> doesn't rely on .la files. i18n.so is built - you could install that
>> instead if you wanted to, couldn't you?
>
> Strictly speaking, ltdl is advertised as most reliable when .la's are
> available. If .so's work as well in some cases, great; but why create
> an unneeded portability worry for the future to rediscover?
I've miscommunicated. Thomas' question was in two parts, and Paolo's
answer suggested that the answer to both parts was "yes". I wanted to
point out that ".la"s are not required, not advocate using ".so"s where
".la"s are available.
Mike