On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 03:30 +1030, Ron wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 09:34:53PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > > tags 560786 + wontfix > > thanks > > > > On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 08:22:12PM +1030, Ron wrote: > > > Not all machines that it's useful to be able to run gdb on > > > also need or want python installed. Can we please make this > > > extra dependency optional? > > > > No, we can't. You build GDB either with or without linking to Python. > > I don't see a reason to split the GDB package into two and double its > > archive size for this. > > I do appreciate, and share, your concern for not bloating the archive > needlessly, but my concern is balancing that against the needs of small > Debian systems, where the extra deps this drags in are of themselves a > quite substantial and needless extra bloat. They are considerably larger > than gdb is itself, and needing to put extra flash on a board, just to > install python, which the board itself will never use, hits a much harder > limit than an extra 4MB package in the archive would. [...] Why would you install gdb on a (non-development) system, rather than a gdb stub? Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part