Chipzz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Some packages have an option to compile with extra warnings - glib is > one of those IIRC. We should probably have a seperate procedure for > those packages.
A full backtrace from gdb is probably more usefull than some extra warnings, I think we should have a -gdb for these files too. > Second, is this the same method as redhat uses to ship their debug > info? > I just looked at the man-page of dh_strip, and AFAICT, it just makes an > unstripped copy of the library in /usr/lib/debug, while, if I understand > correctly, RedHat actually strips the debug info out of the file and > saves it in a seperate file. from the dh_strip manpage: "The command "dh_strip --dbg-package=libfoo" will make dh_strip save the debugging symbols for usr/lib/libfoo.so.0 into usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/libfoo.so.0 in the package build directory for libfoo-dbg." "dh_strip save the debugging symbols" ... I'm not sure. Is it the full file or just the symbol as for Redhat ? Do you know how Redhat makes the debug packages ? > Is their a debian policy wrt debug info, and what do you think is the > best approach? I don't know if there is a policy about this, but providing -dbg packages is usefull to track bug, so I think we need them ... the question is to know how to do that. Having -dbg packages is the best way to have the same version of package and package-dbg and to keep an easy install. Cheers, Sebastien Bacher
