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 1E7Uxm-0004oq-N6 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:20:59 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7N9JSa6005145; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:19:28 GMT Received: from callisto.cs.kun.nl (callisto.cs.kun.nl [131.174.33.75]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7N9Hlvt007202 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 09:17:47 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by callisto.cs.kun.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F1C32E821A for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:16:58 +0200 (CEST) From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] stripping implementation in portage Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:16:46 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.1 References: <20050822223849.GW10816@nightcrawler> In-Reply-To: <20050822223849.GW10816@nightcrawler> X-Face: #Lb+'V@sGJ;ptgo5}V"W+5OCoo{LZv;bh,s,`WKLi/J)ed1_$0;6X<=?utf-8?q?700LVV/=3BLqPhiDP=5E=0A=09=27f=5Dfnv?=@%6M8\'HR1t=aFx;ePfp{ZQoBe+e)JOQ8T5*(_;mHY+cltLGq<;@$Y,=?utf-8?q?O=5C=24=0A=09Tm=23G6M?=,g![Q62J{na*S9d;R[^8pc%u\aiLqU@`kJtYl"^6pxdW 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="nextPart1208907.152DdRcyYx"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200508231116.56154.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: a3e37b83-f7be-4d8a-aca3-3078fb6485c6 X-Archives-Hash: 9068e5fff0b117cc790af60eebc56d68 --nextPart1208907.152DdRcyYx Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline 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= =20 to have a different basedir. My idea was to create a "custom" strip=20 wrapper that would create external debugging files (like now possible=20 with gdb/binutils) and point them to a location=20 in /usr/src/packagenameplusversion. For that it would be necessary to in=20 some way hack the source location in the debug information. Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --nextPart1208907.152DdRcyYx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDCumIbKx5DBjWFdsRAidBAJ9K3HdHZmYfW898qMoz99nDO3vyRgCeMVI4 hf/g1VQnoD09AbYBd8Wjc9Y= =iv4U -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1208907.152DdRcyYx-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list