[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mandatory -dbg packages


Tzafrir Cohen has written on Tuesday, 30 October, at 17:04:
>On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 05:18:41PM +0200, Andrej N. Gritsenko wrote:
>> Stefano Rivera has written on Monday, 29 October, at 16:57:
>> >Hi Tzafrir (2012.10.29_16:29:06_+0200)
>> >> While clearing your throat, mind telling us how this works in Ubuntu
>> >> with PPAs? What happens if you installed a package from a PPA and you
>> >> want to generate a backtrace of a program that happens to use that
>> >> package?
>> >> 1. You'll get debug information for the package.
>> >> 2. You won't get debug information for the package.
>> >> 3. You may accidentally get debug information for a diffent version of
>> >>    the package.
>> >2. It'll tell you that there aren't any debug symbols available. (IIRC)
>> >The -dbgsym packages are only generated in primary archive builds.
>>     I'm sorry to disappoint you about the Ubuntu PPAs but look into my
>> PPA - https://launchpad.net/~andrej-rep/+archive/ppa/+packages - to see
>> all those dbg packages. And users were used them to give me feedback to
>> bugs with full backtrace.

>But if you followed the Ubuntu way, you wouldn't have generated a -dbg
>package for it, right?

    You mean if the debian/rules had only one rule '%:' with 'dh ${@}'?
Sure, I wouldn't. But simple solution isn't always right solution despite
of Occam's razor - in case if simplification kills functionality. And no
automations are done in Ubuntu either, if you meant that.

>I see that the Ubuntu package still produces a -dbg package. I figure
>that this is not what you would expect of an Ubuntu package.

Many of packages in Ubuntu now produce -dbg packages. Just example:

xxx@xxx> grep '^Package: .*-dbg$' /var/lib/apt/lists/ubuntu.org.ua_ubuntu_dists_oneiric_main_binary-i386_Packages | wc -l
xxx@xxx> grep '^Source:' /var/lib/apt/lists/ubuntu.org.ua_ubuntu_dists_oneiric_main_binary-i386_Packages | sort | uniq | wc -l

>Is it possible to change dh_strip's --dbg-package to produce (or not)
>the dbg package in certain build conditions?

    Of course, I have an option to dh_strip there to have it but it is
common enough to have described name of debug package in debian/rules.

>The closest thing I see to that is http://bugs.debian.org/510772 .

    Yes, I'm agree, to automate debug packaging would be nice thing. For
example, AltLinux (RPM-based distro) has it automated.

    With best wishes.

Reply to: