On Fri, September 14, 2012 04:35:47 PM Thiago Macieira wrote: > On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 16.21.44, Thomas Senyk wrote: > > On Fri, September 14, 2012 04:08:57 PM Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > I made it default to no-stripping. > > > > Why? Shouldn't stripping be the default? > > I don't think it should, neither does Simon. But Lars, Ossi and you think it > should. > > Since I prepared the patch while there's no consensus, I opted to go for my > preference.
Hmm I mainly agree with most of your arguments. The use-case I have in mind is cross-compiling, where people not always know what they are doing ;) One thing which could reduce that problem is adding it stripping-setting to the configure-output? > > > Having "some" information in the binary isn't very helpful anyway. > > I agree that package manager need something to disable stripping if it > > needs to happen in another stage of package build, but that's no argument > > for having it off on default. > > > > A argument for stripping as default: > > A lot of people don't know what's the right thing to do in most cases ... > > so the "best" option should be taken. and the best options are IMHO: > > - debug build -> all information > > - release build -> best possible performance/size/... > > We're using -O2 in release mode, which increases code size. If size was an > issue, we'd have -Os. > > What's more, EVERYTHING out there except for Qt builds with no stripping by > default. I think being consistent is more important. _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
