[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

** Project changed: juju-core => juju -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1564662 Title: Juju binaries should be stripped To manage notifications about this bug go to:

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

This bug was fixed in the package juju-core - 2.0~beta12-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 --- juju-core (2.0~beta12-0ubuntu1.16.04.1) xenial-proposed; urgency=medium [ Nicholas Skaggs ] * New upstream release 2.0-beta12 (LP: #1604137). * Update debian/copyright. * Add skip to

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

Hello Martin, or anyone else affected, Accepted juju-core into xenial-proposed. The package will build now and be available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/juju- core/2.0~beta12-0ubuntu1.16.04.1 in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository. Please help us by testing this new

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

** Changed in: juju-core Milestone: 2.0.0 => 2.0-beta14 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1564662 Title: Juju binaries should be stripped To manage notifications about this bug go

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

** Changed in: juju-core Status: Triaged => Fix Released ** Changed in: juju-core Milestone: 2.1.0 => 2.0.0 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1564662 Title: Juju binaries

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

This bug was fixed in the package juju-core - 2.0~beta12-0ubuntu3.16.10.1 --- juju-core (2.0~beta12-0ubuntu3.16.10.1) yakkety; urgency=medium * Add skip to current-manual-provider for bug 1605313 and bug 1605050 -- Nicholas Skaggs Thu, 21 Jul 2016

Re: [Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

building cmd/juju with go 1.7 tip and then stripping results in a binary that is "only" 33 MB, so there is some progress being made there too :-) On 6 April 2016 at 17:30, John A Meinel wrote: > I tried stripping my 1.6 based build, and it seems to be working. (Juju >

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

I tried stripping my 1.6 based build, and it seems to be working. (Juju does reflection at init() time as part of some of the registries), so it seems safe to do. On the flip side it isn't amazingly better. It seems to be a bit less than 2:1. (73MB down to 40MB.) Almost certainly still worth it,

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

** Tags added: packaging -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1564662 Title: Juju binaries should be stripped To manage notifications about this bug go to:

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

This will be a target for the Juju team to update and verify that the stripping of the binary is safe and passes all testing. This requires building in some gating based on if the binary is golang vs gccgo. ** Also affects: juju-core Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in:

[Bug 1564662] Re: Juju binaries should be stripped

This will be a target for the Juju team to update and verify that the stripping of the binary is safe and passes all testing. This requires building in some gating based on if the binary is golang vs gccgo. ** Also affects: juju-core Importance: Undecided Status: New ** Changed in: