[Xquartz-dev] 2.3.0-rc6

[Peter O'Gorman]

Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> On Jul 13, 2008, at 4:34 AM, Martin Costabel wrote:
> 
>> The argument remains valid: If you remove the *.la files, you cut off
>> any upgrade path. Now I don't know if Macports cares about  
>> upgradability
>> from Leopard to SnowLeopard, but I know that Fink does. Your move will
>> be a major headache for anyone compiling  software on their own Mac.
> 
> It's still not clear to me what utility is being provided by the .la  
> files, however - can someone perhaps speak to that a little (from an  
> external perspective)?  The question is important given that we're  
> also looking at nuking the .la files for other projects in SnowLeopard.

I would not be unhappy if Apple nuked all .la files from SnowLeopard. I
could avoid fixing some bugs in fact :)

.la files provide:
Dependency library information that is added to the link line with
-dylib_file arguments, so that ld can create two level namespace
libraries without complaining about undefined references to indirectly
referenced symbols. This is not necessary any more with ld64.

Dependency library information for linking static archives.

A hacky method to work around linking to loadable bundles (if the .la
file is there and there is a MH_BUNDLE (.so) but no MH_DYLIB libtool
will add the static archive and cross its fingers. This is not necessary
with any of the libraries that Apple currently ships.

Broken -isysroot linking.

Too many dependent libraries added to the link line with libtool-1.5.x
and earlier.

A headache.

Peter
-- 
Peter O'Gorman
http://pogma.com