Re: [gentoo-dev] stripping implementation in portage

[Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1744 bytes --]

On Tuesday 23 August 2005 00:38, 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.
>
> IOW, if you prefer stripped binaries on your livefs, the stripping
> occurs while merging to the livefs- this leaves you the option
> of having binpkgs that *do* carry non-stripped binaries/libs.
> Situation can be reversed also, for the embedded crowd.
>
> Downside, for people who flat out want stripping across the board,
> it's a bit more flipping it on, although that's addressed via inherit
> support within the underlying config (just take my word on that one :)
> Also involves a bit more logic, but that's just implementation voodoo.
>
> So... thoughts?  I'd be particularly curious about any package where
> this wouldn't be viable.
>
> Aside from that, cc'ing both lists, would prefer the discussion on dev
> since the implementation can go either way; preference of if that
> flexibility is desired or not is a user thing, so we discuss it in
> their ml.

As an aside to this. Does anyone know how debug information can be changed 
to have a different basedir. My idea was to create a "custom" strip 
wrapper that would create external debugging files (like now possible 
with gdb/binutils) and point them to a location 
in /usr/src/packagenameplusversion. For that it would be necessary to in 
some way hack the source location in the debug information.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]