On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, David Paleino wrote:

That's common practice in library packaging -- if a bug shows up, gdb isn't
really useful if no debugging symbols are provided. And, it's just simpler
telling a user "do apt-get install libodin-dbg" then "do:

apt-get source odin
apt-get build-dep odin
DEBBUILDOPTS=nostrip debian/rules binary
dpkg -i ../...
"

Do you agree? ;)

Yes, I agree in principle.  But I try to apply some common sense
for every single instance of this principle:  If chances are really
low that any user will need such a -dbg package *in practice* I
decide *personally* to not support such a package.  I will definitely
not stop anybody else to do the real art of packaging - I just
expressed my personal habit.

(in my vision, *we* are the maintainer with coding/packaging skills, and should
do everything to make users' life the easiest possible).

That's an ideal way of maintenance and if you do such exemplary
packaging it is fine.

Asked upstream, CCed the list.

Well done

      Andreas.

--
http://fam-tille.de


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Reply via email to