On Nov 6 20:29, Federico Kircheis via Cygwin wrote: > > On 06/11/2021 18.30, Corinna Vinschen via Cygwin wrote: > > On Nov 6 15:31, Federico Kircheis via Cygwin wrote: > > > it seems that cygport always strip binaries, but I have one program that > > > when stripped does not work correctly. > > > > Out of curiosity, what program is that? And why does it require the > > symbols to be present in the executable? > > > > > > Corinna > > > > Hi Corinna, > > it's pari-gp the program I'm having trouble packaging. > > If I compile it manually, without cygport, then I'm able to execute it. > If I use cygport, then the program misbehaves. > > I've noticed that cygport strips the binaries, so I thought that could be > the issue.
If the application isn't doing some really weird stuff, I seriously doubt it. > Why does cygport strip binaries by default? > Doesn't it generally makes harder to debug issues? Actually, no. What cygport really does is this: - create binaries with debug info - create debug info files from the non-stripped binaries and copy them to usr/debug/... - strip the binary and pack it into the base package "foo" - pack the debug info files into the debug package "foo-debug" So, a user of the package gets just the smaller stripped foo binary, while a developer can install the foo-debug package and actually debug the foo binary. > Is it a common practice for GNU/Linux distribution to strip binaries when > creating packages? Yes. Plus generating the debug info package. Corinna -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
