On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 02:46:39PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Hi, > > what's the correct way to handle debugging information in MinGW packages? > > Currently, mingw32-nsis builds everything with debugging information (due to > the debian-debug-opt patch), even the MinGW parts, but the MinGW debugging > information is not extracted, so it's included within the binaries. This is > particularly annoying for NSIS installers as it bloats the installer stubs. > For example, the lzma_solid stub is 210185 bytes, running a MinGW strip on > it reduces it to 55296 bytes. > > Do we really want debugging information in the MinGW stuff even if it can't > be extracted into separate -debuginfo? Or should the MinGW portions of NSIS > be built without -g instead? Should the same policy apply to everything or > should NSIS be special? (I can see why a developer would want to have > debugging information for a library, but for an installer?)
Last time we tried, a cross compiled GDB crashed & burned. So unless someone can demonstrate a usuable WINE/Win32 debugger that can use the gcc generated debugging info, then we should not build with -g, nor create -debuginfo sub-RPMs. The exception being the base toolchain that is natively compiled should of course have debuginfo as normal. Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://ovirt.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :| _______________________________________________ fedora-mingw mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-mingw
