❦ 11 octobre 2016 10:38 CEST, Ben Finney <bign...@debian.org> :

>> Reading
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Python/LibraryStyleGuide#Building_python_-dbg_packages,
>> there is some hints to this
> The introduction of ‘foo-dbgsym’ automatic generated packages makes me
> quite sure those instructions are obsolete. But perhaps they are not?
>> but it's not clear that only automatic debug packages work for Python
>> packages. Would it make sense to update the wiki page and say "don't
>> migrate to dbgsym packages as Python needs debug extensions and not
>> only debug symbols"?
> Reading that reference again, I am not much wiser. It does not reference
> ‘foo-dbgsym’ packages so the reader doesn't know which instructions are
> to be followed.
> Could someone who understands *why* ‘foo-dbgsym’ is not sufficient,
> please update the wiki page to be explicit about what is special to
> Python and under what specific circumstances we still need ‘foo-dbg’
> packages.

The page seems up-to-date and already explains why Python is different
(presence of a debug interpreter) and that the -dbg package contains the
symbols for the regular extensions as well as the unstripped extensions
for the debug interpreter.
When one burns one's bridges, what a very nice fire it makes.
                -- Dylan Thomas

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to