[SOLVED] Slackware current missing .la files

ponce · 04-26-2018, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lcd047

Sadly, one can only compile a single package on a clean slackware current. Compiling a second package is always done on a non-clean one.

that is true only if, for building packages, you don't use virtual machines (with snapshots), containers (with snapshots), layered filesystems or tools that already have this as a feature like slackrepo.
but also on physical machines, uninstalling the package you just built usually doesn't leave the system polluted...

lonestar_italy · 04-26-2018, 04:43 AM

Delete the other .la files that you have, coming from unofficial slackware packages.
You are having the error because you have some .la file that is expecting to find some other .la file that has been removed. But removing even the initial .la file will make everything work.

Just do what suggested by Patrick:

Code:

rm /{,usr/}lib{,64}/*.la

chrisVV · 04-26-2018, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lcd047

Sadly, one can only compile a single package on a clean slackware current. Compiling a second package is always done on a non-clean one.

That is rubbish. Just delete any existing la files in the /usr/lib[64] directory that your custom packages may have previously installed, and if and when you come to build any new ones, modify their build scripts so as not to install any further la files.

This is perfectly well explained in ChangeLog.txt for slackware-current.

Ne01eX · 04-28-2018, 09:13 AM

This is not is rubbish. This is reinforced concrete mechanism by GNU for GNU-systems. Pat broke this mechanism.

Mechanism with pkgconfig - another mechanism, designed, originally by RedHat for GTK+/GNOME. And yes, this also GNU, but another. :-)

IMHO, mechanism with *.la files is _try_. But it seems that the cockroaches in his head whispered to Patrick another opinion. :-)

However, I agree with him in the part that the mechanism should be one. Only I'm not sure that using pkgconfig is the right way. Time will judge. Time is the best judge.

willysr · 04-28-2018, 09:40 AM

In what way did he broke the mechanism? It's upstream who decided which build tools will be used in their project and Patrick simply follow upstream decision. More and more projects are moving to meson and abandon autotools in the process.

To avoid unwanted situation (updating many packages once a new -stable has been released), Pat take an early decision to remove all .la files in core packages and that will be followed by other third party applications in the future.

volkerdi · 04-28-2018, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ne01eX

But it seems that the cockroaches in his head whispered to Patrick another opinion. :-)

Are you about through yet?

Honest to God, if the moderators don't kick you I'm about to be done with this site.

michaelk · 04-28-2018, 02:54 PM

He is now. A swift kick has been given...