On Apr 12, 2005, Alexander Dalloz <ad+lists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Having gcc on your system you certainly want libtool too. Not really. libtool, as well as autoconf and automake, are designed to not be necessary for people who build packages, only for people who modify the package sources, using the tools to update the generated files that are to be shipped in the package buildable tarball. Therefore, removing libtool is perfectly reasonable, unless you happen to be developing a package whose source repository doesn't include generated files, for example, or that might need libtoolize run for whatever reason. I realize a number of spec files do run libtoolize, as well as aclocal, autoconf, automake, autoheader, autoreconf, etc. I've long considered this to be a bug, and recommend patching the sources to obtain the desired change. That's what patches are for. With the current approach, packages stop building at random because of updates of autotools, and then people blame autotools, instead of blaming the packager. If people took the correct approach, we could even push autotools to Extras. I can't think of any legitimate reason to BuildRequiring them. -- Alexandre Oliva http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/ Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org} Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
