Bug#783876: gcc-5: consider stripping lto1 / cc1 / cc1plus

[Santiago Vila <sanvila@unex.es>]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 12:22:33AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
> On 22.04.2016 00:11, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >The problem with that is that it breaks the expectation that testing
> >is in an "always releaseable" state.
> >
> >Sure, the file /etc/debian_version breaks such expectation too, but of
> >course this is absolutely minor compared with the huge gcc binaries.
> 
> this is off topic, however I think this base-files change is rather serious,
> because it lies about the status of sid/unstable.  From my point of view
> such a change of base-files should go to testing directly.

During the freeze, the release managers usually request that all fixes
are handled via unstable, so the policy that testing and unstable are
sides of the same coin is still in effect.

Also, during the freeze we should worry about the stable distribution
we are about to release, not about /etc/debian_version telling or not
telling the "truth" in unstable. That's a completely minor thing.

Once that you realize that unstable is just a staging area for
testing, whatever thing that may happen in unstable and only in
unstable becomes irrelevant.


Speaking of testing/unstable: If it were possible for you to
ship stripped gcc binaries in testing (but not in unstable),
would you do it?

Thanks.