Greg Troxel wrote:
> executive summary: having foo.la in PLIST is interpreted as also
> having all the referenced files, and if foo.la is a symlink to bar.la,
> pkg_install and pkg_delete complain about overwritten/missing files.
[snip]
> In guile-pg's world view (and in the guile-pg's mainainter's forked
> guile), binary guile modules should be named with just the module
> name.  In guile 1.6.x (current FSF stable), the binary guile module
> '(foo bar baz)' is looked for in foo/bar/libbaz.la.  Earlier I sent a
> bug report to guile-pg, resulting in the compatibility symlink.
> 
> So, the automatic .la PLIST handling is dysfunctionally smart here.
> Is there a way to turn it off for a given file?  Should
> scripts/print-la-libnames simply not expand .la files that are
> symlinks?

I think that your suggestion of not expanding .la files that are 
symlinks is the right one.

	Cheers,

	-- Johnny Lam <jlam@buildlink.org>