[RFC] Delete all .la files?

[RFC] Delete all .la files?

[Burton, Ross]

Hi,

So I've just done an oe-core world build with my latest .la-killer class
enabled (
https://github.com/rossburton/meta-ross/blob/master/classes/wipe-la.bbclass)
and the results are pretty good.  Basically this class hooks onto
do_install and simply deletes every *.la file it can find in ${D}, with an
opt-out if required.  .la files can cause rebuild problems if directories
move around and are mostly pointless on Linux anyway, so they can just be
deleted.

One recipe (opensp-native) needs to opt out of the .la deletion as
openjade-native for <redacted> reasons explicitly expects .la files to be
installed.  Some other desktop distros already strip out .la files so I
wouldn't be surprised if there's a patch floating around to solve this.

One recipe fails to build (gcc-sanitizers) as it expects to have built its
own libstdc++ so the recipe just deletes the source and drops in symlinks
to the libraries in the sysroot.  Works, but is nasty.   I could either opt
gcc out of la removal, or improve the fixup to make it actually link to the
installed libraries.  Or, merge the sanitisers into the main gcc recipe, as
I can't recall why they're separate anyway.

Apart from that, my world build was successful.

So in the new year I plan on submitting a renamed version of this class to
oe-core and adding it to INHERIT_DISTRO.  Any comments?

Ross

Re: [OE-core] [RFC] Delete all .la files?

[Burton, Ross]

On 23 December 2015 at 22:49, Phil Blundell <pb@pbcl.net> wrote:

> Sounds good to me.  I have been using the patch from:
>
>
> http://lists.openembedded.org/pipermail/openembedded-core/2012-October/069912.html
>
> for what is apparently the past three years and it continues to work
> well.
>

That's good to know, thanks Phil.  Does  your work not build
openjade-native?  As I said that needed .la files to be present in my
testing so I'm wondering what the difference is.

Ross

Re: [RFC] Delete all .la files?

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Op 23-12-15 om 22:41 schreef Burton, Ross:
> Hi,
> 
> So I've just done an oe-core world build with my latest .la-killer class 
> enabled ( 
> https://github.com/rossburton/meta-ross/blob/master/classes/wipe-la.bbclass)
>
> 
and the results are pretty good.  Basically this class hooks onto
> do_install and simply deletes every *.la file it can find in ${D}, with
> an opt-out if required.  .la files can cause rebuild problems if
> directories move around and are mostly pointless on Linux anyway, so they
> can just be deleted.
> 
> One recipe (opensp-native) needs to opt out of the .la deletion as 
> openjade-native for <redacted> reasons explicitly expects .la files to
> be installed.  Some other desktop distros already strip out .la files so
> I wouldn't be surprised if there's a patch floating around to solve
> this.
> 
> One recipe fails to build (gcc-sanitizers) as it expects to have built
> its own libstdc++ so the recipe just deletes the source and drops in
> symlinks to the libraries in the sysroot.  Works, but is nasty.   I could
> either opt gcc out of la removal, or improve the fixup to make it
> actually link to the installed libraries.  Or, merge the sanitisers into
> the main gcc recipe, as I can't recall why they're separate anyway.
> 
> Apart from that, my world build was successful.
> 
> So in the new year I plan on submitting a renamed version of this class
> to oe-core and adding it to INHERIT_DISTRO.  Any comments?

Go ahead, .la files need to go away in the OE world. I wish your class had
an option to kill them with fire, but alas.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iD8DBQFWgTZAMkyGM64RGpERAph9AJ0Tdmw9r3WW5OrQv6FTUGdh6zOiIwCcCyuu
9CHG+z9GGf7hW4GkdaRchZU=
=l+7i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [OE-core] [RFC] Delete all .la files?

[Burton, Ross]

On 29 December 2015 at 11:21, Phil Blundell <pb@pbcl.net> wrote:

> Oh, yes, you're right.  In fact I don't build openjade-native
> routinely, but a bit of git archaeology reveals that I do have the
> following patch in my tree as well.
>

You're my hero, thanks. :)

Ross

Re: [OE-core] [RFC] Delete all .la files?

[Burton, Ross]

On 4 January 2016 at 08:48, Clemens Lang <clemens.lang@bmw-carit.de> wrote:

> Note that any software using libltdl will still require the .la files
> and must thus opt-out of .la file deletion. ImageMagick is probably the
> most common occurrence of this.
>

The use of modules in imagemagick is disabled by default, so this only
impacts people who change that default (and the wiper will optional).

Ross

Re: [RFC] Delete all .la files?

[Burton, Ross]

On 23 December 2015 at 21:41, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:

> So in the new year I plan on submitting a renamed version of this class to
> oe-core and adding it to INHERIT_DISTRO.  Any comments?
>

Technicalities time: should this be a new class that is in the default
INHERIT_DISTRO?  Or directly integrated into base.bbclass?  Does anyone
have a strong opinion either way?

Ross

Re: [RFC] Delete all .la files?

[Christopher Larson]

On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 10:28 AM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:

> On 23 December 2015 at 21:41, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > So in the new year I plan on submitting a renamed version of this class
> to
> > oe-core and adding it to INHERIT_DISTRO.  Any comments?
> >
>
> Technicalities time: should this be a new class that is in the default
> INHERIT_DISTRO?  Or directly integrated into base.bbclass?  Does anyone
> have a strong opinion either way?


I'm inclined to say separate class.. as much as I hate too much class
proliferation, base.bbclass does an awful lot of stuff already, arguably
too much. *shrug*
-- 
Christopher Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Senior Software Engineer, Mentor Graphics