Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, 2002-08-18 at 15:45, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Please see also my comments in #113525. > > I personally have no strong opinion on this, really. Whoever wrote > the Rationale: part of this section obviously disagrees with you, > though.
Yes, but it's complete and utter crap; it was then and still is now. Ben ran a buildd on vore which is one of the faster buildds, but I've run both vore and some of our slower (arm, m68k) buildds and I can guarantee you that the additional time incurred by using '-g' is so insignificant it's insulting to have to even discuss it. The whole -g thing really ought to be fixed; it snuck in AFAICS/R bypassing the proper policy procedure, and is, in any event, entirely bogus. -- James
