Re: [PROPOSAL] changing policy on compiling with -g .. a better way
On Wed, Sep 01, 1999 at 04:18:55PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> Looks like this proposal may be turning into a complete subsection on
> DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS :)
Yeah, why not.
> Makes sense to do this. Since Manoj says the last diff was his last attempt at
> it, I'll rewrite it to include this and Cc to the BTS.
Ok. I didn't check the very latest closely enough, but if it still says "if
DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS is 'debug'", you may want to change this to "if it
contains debug as a sub string" and provide the sample makefile snippet to
detect this condition.
BTW, I second this proposal. Not that you need my second, but I don't want
to leave any doubt about that it is a good idea. Plus more seconds give you
fame and glory. ;)
This makes it easy to add further options, for example "relax" to only
compile the packages that can be compiled with the available tools (useful
for bootrstapping, see Dale Scheetz thread :) of course, those options will
be in other proposals. If you don't like this example, ignore it and make up
your own.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org for public PGP Key
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de PGP Key ID 36E7CD09
http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/
Reply to: