<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Hi Ross,</p>
<p>Is it recommended practice to remove libtool .la files for
oe-core when some issue pops? If yes, I would withdraw and prepare
a new patch that complies with the practice.<br>
</p>
Thanks,<br>
Yuanjie<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/21/2016 05:01 PM, Burton, Ross
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJTo0LZv9h-BrVNypGiZEQqoGps09kioNwBfMtUncA8rUk7vvQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 21 September 2016 at 02:46,
Yuanjie Huang <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:yuanjie.huang@windriver.com"
target="_blank">yuanjie.huang@windriver.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div id=":15q" class="a3s aXjCH m1574a6cecf964841">We have
some user making use of these libraries directly,
otherwise, cross gcc can link these sanitizer libraries
with just -fsantizer flag without problem. Without .la
files, his flow can not be libtoolized.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
libtool works fine without .la files on linux, which is why
the remove-libtool class works (which can be a distro-level
inherit and deletes every .la before it reaches the sysroot).</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">Ross</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>