Accepted libgphoto2 2.4.0-2ubuntu2 (source)

[Steve Langasek]

On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:03:34AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hi,

> Achim Bohnet [2007-10-03 21:16 -0000]:
> >  libgphoto2 (2.4.0-2ubuntu2) gutsy; urgency=low
> >  .
> >    * debian/*.files: Move .la files from -dev package to libgphoto2-2
> >      and libgphoto2-port0 packages. kdelibs dynaloader needs the .la files.
> >      Closes: LP: 145239. Upstream bug report: http://bugs.kde.org/125696

> That seems weird to me.

Not that weird, I'm afraid.  There have been other cases where packages
wanted .la files for plugins at runtime and didn't work right without them;
the slapd package had .la files for its plugins re-added in response to
pressure from upstream, because various documentation says to use the .la
files by name in config files.

> We started some efforts to get rid of .la files altogether. They are
> already useless and actively harmful in -dev packages, but having them in
> the library packages sounds like working around a bug in the kdelibs
> dynaloader, than being a proper bug fix.

OTOH, shipping .la files corresponding to *plugins* in a -dev package is
equally wrong.  .la files for plugins belong in the runtime package or
nowhere at all, depending on your POV.