On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 07:54:00PM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2002 at 12:12:04PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Incidentally, is there a reason that the bytecode version stores > > important information in the sections that are stripped? It seems to me > > that this is a bug in the package's build sequence or in the compiler. > > Or is it a file format that can't be stripped, which dh_strip is trying > > to act on anyways (which would be a bug in debhelper)? > Ocaml bytecode executable, that are linked in custom mode contains the > virtual machine and in a text section the code to be executed. So if you > strip such an executable you loose the code and you get only the virtual > machine. Every ELF binary I've ever seen has a .text section, so I'm sure there must be more to it than that. Either ocaml's compiler is placing important data in a section normally not used for non-expendable information, or strip (or the standard Debian use of strip) is mistakenly removing a section/symbol which it shouldn't. /Something/ has a bug, so it would be nice if this was fixed (at least eventually) so that ocaml-based binaries can also benefit from strip. :) Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpGYsMQxEaEA.pgp
Description: PGP signature