[Pkg-openmpi-maintainers] Bug#456721: Processed: Re: Bug#456721:libpetsc.so depends on unexistent libraries

[Manuel Prinz]

Am Dienstag, den 18.12.2007, 18:12 -0600 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel:
> IIRC "we have no choice" as Policy mandates static builds. May be a
> 'recommends' though.

I'm not sure about that. I didn't see that on a quick read of chapters 8
and 10, though policy states in 10.2:
>         Packages that use libtool to create shared libraries should
>         include the .la files in the -dev package, unless the package
>         relies on libtool's libltdl library, in which case the .la
>         files must go in the run-time library package.

So including the .la files was OK. The question I asked myself is
whether we should compile the static libraries and/or (also) include
the .la files. I have to do more reading on that one.

> On 19 December 2007 at 00:43, Manuel Prinz wrote:
> | If noone has complaints, I will apply it to trunk.
> Always apply, we can always fix later. No point in sending patches.

Done.

> I'll try to build this later to see where I'm at w.r.t. my Rmpi breakage.
> 
> Thanks for all your work,  Dirk

You're welcome! Besides that, I was the one who broke it in the first
place. ;)

Best regards
Manuel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-openmpi-maintainers/attachments/20071219/47d6f96f/attachment-0003.pgp