On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 08:15:50AM -0700, dann frazier wrote: > 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.
That sounds fine to me. Especually as people could easily enable this and build them for themselves, or throw them up somewhere for people to grab in the course of resolving a problem. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
