Re: large binary, why not strip ?

[Matthew Seaman]

Matthew Seaman wrote:

Kris Kennaway wrote:

Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most cases it
will be a simple matter of changing the port's do-install: target to
use INSTALL_* macros instead of cp/bsdtar etc.  This would be a good
project to get some familiarity with the ports tree.

it's the obvious place to put such a test.


some code.


something substantive to talk about.

Would it be worthwhile to add a test and warning that all installed binaries have not been stripped to the 'security-check' target in bsd.port.mk? That's not really what that target was intended for (feeping creaturism alert!) but Probably cleaner to create a whole new target, but that's going to duplicate Hmmmm... I shall work up some patches, probably over the weekend, so there's

Done: ports/129210

For the record, I also discovered that, contrary to what I said earlier,
there is  apparently one class of binary object that will not work correctly
if stripped: kernel loadable modules.

As others have commented, most shlibs installed from ports aren't stripped.
The same applies to almost any sort of pluggable module (perl, PHP etc.) that
I have been able to investigate.

        Cheers,

        Matthew

--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
                                                 Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey     Ramsgate
                                                 Kent, CT11 9PW

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature