Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Currently, policy says that it's recommended (the weakest policy > directive) to support noopt and nostrip. My main concern with increasing > the strength of that directive is that, depending on how demented the > upstream build system is, it can be difficult to support these options, > and since neither is used for regular builds in Debian, they're not > usually tested and aren't necessary for properly functioning packages.
I have a little bit of experience with recompiling packages to include debug symbols. In that little of experience I found that the easiest way to do it was to put a set of wrapper programs in $PATH that ensured that compilers added debug symbols and that programs and options to remove them were ignored. I wonder whether this general approach would be better than requiring each package maintainer to implement a pair of build-time options. The most obvious trouble I can see with it is packages that invoke tools through absolute paths or reset $PATH themselves. (I haven't followed previous discussion of these options. If this approach has already been considered and discounted, please ignore me.) -- Ben Pfaff http://benpfaff.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]