On Fri, 20 Jun 1997, Michael Meskes wrote: > Sorry but I disagree here. For a user who only wants to debug his own > program debugging symbols in the libraries are not needed. > > I'd prefer to have several packages: checker-bin, checker-libs, > checker-dbg or something like that. Remember, we do not distribute > debugging symbols in other libraries for the same reason. Instead we > provide an *-dbg package. > > What do others think about this?
The reason we don't distribute deugging symbols in our other libraries is because those libraries are meant for stand alone apps, i.e. not to be dubugged as easily, however checker, whose only purpose is debugging should include the symbols. Shaya -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
