[th/rpm] R: libtool(*.la) - good or bad

[Tomasz Trojanowski]

On Sun, 2006-11-26 at 22:22 +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On Sunday 26 November 2006 22:12, Tomasz Trojanowski wrote:
> 
> > > Of course there are still problems.
> > >
> > >  libdb.la symlink to real file libdb-4.5.la
> > >
> > > Now other packages get R: libtool(libdb.la) but nothing provides it since
> > > it's not detected.
> > >
> > > Wouldn't be it better to generate Requires: /usr/lib/file.la instead of
> > > libtool(/usr/lib/file.la) ? That way we wouldn't need to rebuild all
> > > packages containing .la files.
> >
> > Or simply:
> >
> > --- libtooldeps.sh.orig 2006-11-26 00:16:19 +0100
> > +++ libtooldeps.sh      2006-11-26 22:06:56 +0100
> > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@
> >             do
> >                 case "$dep" in
> >                 /*.la)
> > +                   $dep = `readlink -f $dep`
> >                     echo "libtool($dep)"
> >                     ;;
> >                 esac
> >
> 
> That won't work.

Will. Ie. some package R: libtool(/usr/lib/libdb.la), with this patch
will be converted to R: libtool(/usr/lib/libdb-4.5.la), which is
provided by db4.5-devel

>  The dep against libdb.la is correct one. The problem is with 
> provides not requires.



> 
> > Tomek
>