On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 22:16 -0800, Matt Taggart wrote: > dann frazier writes... > > > fyi, I have a patch to the kernel-image build system that would spit out > > a separate package w/ a debug kernel image & module set under /usr/lib. > > I did this in the 2.4.25 timeframe, and I was getting ~204M debug > > packages per flavor. I don't know how big it would be for just the > > image (no modules). > > dannf, I assume "flavor" means each kernel-image source package and the > various kernel-image packages it delivers?
Yeah. > That seems like quite a burden for the archive. I can think of a couple ways > to handle this, > > 1) implement debug packages in the packaging, but don't build them as part of > the default build target. Put instructions in the source on which rule to use > to build your own. The oprofile package could refer users to these. This > would > mean each user who wanted them would need to build them which sucks, but this > is easily implemented. Not a bad idea - seems like the initial support could go into kernel package, and we could honor the DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=debug env var. -- dann frazier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
