Bug#621627: marked as done (gss: Getting rid of unneeded *.la / emptying dependency_libs)

[Debian Bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:26:32 -0700
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: Bug#621627: gss: Getting rid of unneeded *.la / emptying 
dependency_libs
has caused the Debian Bug report #621627,
regarding gss: Getting rid of unneeded *.la / emptying dependency_libs
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact address@hidden
immediately.)


-- 
621627: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=621627
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> gss: Getting rid of unneeded *.la / emptying dependency_libs
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Thu, 07 Apr 2011 18:07:14 +0100
>
>
>
>
> Package: gss
> Severity: normal
> User: address@hidden
> Usertags: la-file-removal
>
> To finish an old release goal from Squeeze, to comply with Policy
> 10.2 and to ease the introduction of MultiArch, I'm filing bugs
> against packages which contain .la files which can be either removed
> or stripped of the dependency_libs variable.
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/LAFileRemoval
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00055.html
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2011/04/msg00199.html
>
> Data has been obtained from the output of an automated script:
>
> http://release.debian.org/~aba/la/current.txt
>
> The output is best read in conjunction with the criteria from this
> post to debian-devel:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2009/08/msg00808.html
>
> To generate the list of packages, I've used:
>
> grep -v depended-on current.txt |cut -d: -f1
>
> The data is regularly updated but please accept my apologies if you
> have made an upload which changes the situation since the data was
> parsed.
>
> gss appears in this list as a source package because one or more of
> the binary packages (usually -dev packages) contain .la files.
>
> In most cases, the .la file(s) can simply be removed as the process
> behind this MBF has already identified that there are no further
> dependencies using the .la file. In the unusual case that your
> package uses libltdl directly, it is still necessary to empty the
> dependency_libs part of all .la files remaining in the package. Once
> gss is fixed, the process will repeat and other packages which you
> maintain may need to be fixed in turn. It is important that packages
> are fixed in sequence to avoid FTBFS bugs.
>
> If you believe that your package needs both the .la file and the
> dependency_libs settings, please raise this on debian-devel for
> clarification.
> -- 
>
> Neil Williams
> =============
> address@hidden
> http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: Bug#621627: gss: Getting rid of unneeded *.la / emptying dependency_libs
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:26:32 -0700
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> Version: 1.0.1-2
>
> address@hidden writes:
>
> > To finish an old release goal from Squeeze, to comply with Policy
> > 10.2 and to ease the introduction of MultiArch, I'm filing bugs
> > against packages which contain .la files which can be either removed
> > or stripped of the dependency_libs variable.
>
> Already fixed in 1.0.1-2, uploaded a few days ago.
>
> -- 
> Russ Allbery (address@hidden)             <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
>
>
> --- End Message ---