Asheesh Laroia scrisse: > > I believe including debug symbols is important here, as there are > > known bugs in the software, and the upstream author's first command > > to anyone who reports a bug is to rebuild with the options included > > in my package, including debug symbols. This will save Debian users > > time, and help improve the software. :) > > I agree with this sentiment for a program like this.
As I've already said, I'm not of the same opinion. Rebuilding a package to stracktrace it is not only author's recommendations, but I'd say it is the standard procedure. You can handle it via DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS, easing your users'life, the same way you're actually handling "noopt" (eg. via a "debug" option). Developer's reference 6.7.9 partially spoke about it, and I think your case is in the "bloat the archive" situation. Moreover it is a single little binary, used for corner-case one-time ext3 recovery, and easily (and quickly) rebuildable. Speaking in general, I think the one-app-one-dbg paradigm is quite harmful for all our infrastructure. Any comment is appreciated, though. Ciao, Luca -- .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Luca Bruno : :' : The Universal O.S. | lucab (AT) debian.org `. `'` | GPG Key ID: 3BFB9FB3 `- http://www.debian.org | Debian GNU/Linux Developer
pgpNzpSm4LFpq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
