From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E7LZc-00018N-BW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:19:24 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7MNHvpi025511; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:17:57 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7MNGGLl013923 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:16:16 GMT Received: from zg040066.ppp.dion.ne.jp ([222.2.40.66] helo=opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1E7LXK-0005PG-Ex for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:17:02 +0000 Received: by opteron246.suzuki-stubbs.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9EA02102DE9; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:17:34 +0900 (JST) From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] stripping implementation in portage Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:17:31 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.90 References: <20050822223849.GW10816@nightcrawler> In-Reply-To: <20050822223849.GW10816@nightcrawler> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1626815.7UrtbsxJQ3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200508230817.34295.jstubbs@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 064c7535-6a2c-4ec2-a599-f48326f1e647 X-Archives-Hash: 3fff4333b9476bda3f051f15160cc50d --nextPart1626815.7UrtbsxJQ3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 23 August 2005 07:38, Brian Harring wrote: > Hola all. > > Short version, the nostrip feature is a bit funky as an option. What > I'm after is effectively building all packages *with* debugging > information as default, and leaving it up to the repository you're > merging the package to, to decide on stripping or not. Makes sense. > So... thoughts? I'd be particularly curious about any package where > this wouldn't be viable. I believe xorg-x11 is one such package. But then, this might just be a=20 reason for a pkg_strip(). =2D-=20 Jason Stubbs --nextPart1626815.7UrtbsxJQ3 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDCl0OxvWNPsk/ZP4RAq9xAJ90TyajpE9+anNa2XnApa9UEIsJ7gCeP7t8 edHJywk9Y1bD09inSsIhYbU= =sE4G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1626815.7UrtbsxJQ3-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list