Re: unstripped stuff in /usr/lib
"Fabrizio" == Fabrizio Polacco <fpolacco@icenet.fi> writes:
> bruce@va.debian.org wrote:
>> We could let the -dev versions of packages have diversions of the
>> libraries to unstripped versions, and have the runtime versions
>> have stripped versions.
Interesting idea. I can't say I'm completely clear on what the status
quo is for this.
> Since most of the times -dev packages are needed to compile only
> (headers and the symlink from lib.so), I think it'd be better to put
> unstripped libraries on a separate -dbg package (as lib_d.a). Those
> libs are easily 10 times the size.
> Usually we have: runtime pkg: shared lib stripped with
> --strip-unneeded develop pkg: static lib stripped with --strip-debug
> debug pkg: static lib unstripped
The use of strip on shared libraries, and the exact flags to give
strip (which is indeed --strip-uneeded), are stipulated in the Debian
Policy Manual (v2.3.0.1, Sec 3.3.2), and also there it states that a
separate package should be provided for debugging versions of the
library.
> I'm not sure on what to do for shared unstripped libs (are they
> supported by gdb, now?)
Any debian package which has non-compliant libraries installed should
have a bug reported against them.
.....A. P. Harris...apharris@onShore.com...<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: