Use-case: When .la files are removed from packages. lafilefixer works by parsing each .la file, extracting all dependency_libs, and doing a substitution of /path/to/liblibrary.la files for -llibrary where possible, adding -L/path/to as appropriate. Test-case: Unmask dev-libs/popt-1.14 run revdep-rebuild -i -- -p run lafilefixer --justfixit run revdep-rebuild -i -- -p Notice the difference
Marked ~hppa.
keyworded ~arch for ppc64
~alpha/~arm/~ia64/~s390/~sh/~sparc done
ppc stable
x86-fbsd done; will do sparc- later
(In reply to comment #5) > x86-fbsd done; will do sparc- later > and done
amd64?
>>Use-case: When .la files are removed from packages. ?????????????? How? It is parsing only existing *.la files. If file is removed, then it is not considered for creation. It don't solve problem of removed *.la files (like in libpcre package)
(In reply to comment #8) > >>Use-case: When .la files are removed from packages. > > > ?????????????? > > How? It is parsing only existing *.la files. If file is removed, then it is not > considered for creation. > It don't solve problem of removed *.la files (like in libpcre package) > The problem is not the removal of the *.la files. It is *.la files pointing to other *.la files in the dependency_libs section and not to the libs directly. This causes errors for other packages that rely on the *.la files being present. If these files are fixed the errors of missing *.la files go away.
OK. I understand. I read somewhere else, that it creates missing *la files, and it is not truth.
It looks like amd64 wasn't CCd on this bug, was that intentional?
$ grep KEYWORDS *.ebuild lafilefixer-0.0.1.ebuild:KEYWORDS="~alpha ~amd64 ~arm ~ia64 ~s390 ~sh ~sparc ~x86" lafilefixer-0.5.ebuild:KEYWORDS="alpha ~amd64 arm hppa ia64 ppc ~ppc64 s390 sh sparc x86 ~sparc-fbsd ~x86-fbsd"
Added ~mips keyword.
should be all set now in the tree; thanks for the report! Commit message: Add m68k love http://sources.gentoo.org/dev-util/lafilefixer/lafilefixer-0.5.ebuild?r1=1.15&r2=1.16
