Re: Can we require build-arch/indep targets for lenny?
Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Currently, policy says that it's recommended (the weakest policy
> directive) to support noopt and nostrip. My main concern with increasing
> the strength of that directive is that, depending on how demented the
> upstream build system is, it can be difficult to support these options,
> and since neither is used for regular builds in Debian, they're not
> usually tested and aren't necessary for properly functioning packages.
I have a little bit of experience with recompiling packages to
include debug symbols. In that little of experience I found that
the easiest way to do it was to put a set of wrapper programs in
$PATH that ensured that compilers added debug symbols and that
programs and options to remove them were ignored. I wonder
whether this general approach would be better than requiring each
package maintainer to implement a pair of build-time options.
The most obvious trouble I can see with it is packages that
invoke tools through absolute paths or reset $PATH themselves.
(I haven't followed previous discussion of these options. If
this approach has already been considered and discounted, please