Re: non-consensus on debug (-g) policy

[Raul Miller <raul@usatoday.com>]

On Mon, Sep 06, 1999 at 04:08:36PM -0400, Ben Collins wrote:
> Ok, this is taking up too much of my time. This was a straight forward
> proposal, that saw no justified technical objections. If I have to argue
> till I'm out of breath on the whim of anyone who sends an objection, then
> this proposal can sit and die.
> 
> This reminds me why I never get involved in policy. Too much politics to
> let progress through. I'll just go back to developing, if policy decides
> I'm no longer important...I'll still keep developing.

All of this aside, I just re-read the relevant policy:

There's no *requirement* that you use -g -- it's recommended,
but not required.  [It is required that you strip the binaries, but
if I recall correctly that's because strip had benefit even on 
binaries compiled without -g.]

So you can go ahead and compile without -g if that's important to you.

-- 
Raul