Re: Automatic Debug Packages
On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 05:42:04PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > I don't have a strong opinion on whether ddebs should be documented in
> > policy, but I certainly don't agree with requiring dpkg to understand
> > them as a prerequisite for implementing a general purpose, public
> > archive for auto-stripped debugging symbols packages. There really is
> > no reason for dpkg to treat these packages specially - a simple
> > namespace convention imposed by Policy (i.e., reserving package names
> > ending in "-ddeb" for use by this archive, which is what has been
> > proposed) is sufficient, and requires no changes to dpkg, which is as it
> > should be.
> Or even just -dbg, since aren't the existing debug packages basically
> .ddebs, modulo bugs?
There are a few significant exceptions, such as libc6-dbg and libqt4-dbg,
where the packages contain complete alternate debug builds of the libraries,
/not/ detached debugging symbols.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/