On May 31, 2018, at 21:50, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 31 May 2018 at 19:45, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> 
>> On May 31, 2018, at 21:42, Eitan Adler wrote:
>>> On 31 May 2018 at 19:40, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>>> Or: A setting in macports.conf that makes MacPorts base add -g for all 
>>>> ports? That would cause the built result to be different. We could offer 
>>>> that, but would have to also make sure that MacPorts doesn't attempt to 
>>>> download any binaries from our packages servers, since they would not have 
>>>> been built with that setting.
>>> 
>>> This one. Personally I'd be fine with "best effort" and fallback to
>>> packages, but I imagine some would not be.
>> 
>> That's not how MacPorts works.
>> 
>> When you ask MacPorts to install a port, it tries to get a binary package. 
>> If that fails, it tries to build from source.
>> 
>> If we introduce a new macports.conf setting that lets you enable debug 
>> symbols, and that setting is not on by default, then that setting will not 
>> be on on our buildbot workers which produce the binary packages. So if you 
>> get a binary package, you will not get debug symbols, even if that setting 
>> is on on your system. You will only get debug symbols if the port, for 
>> whatever reason, builds from source on your system. That would be confusing. 
>> Therefore, so that you get consistent behavior, if we introduce such a new 
>> setting, it must also prevent all use of binary packages.
> 
> I understand, and that's besides the point for now. Would we be
> generally okay with adding a new option to add -g globally?

I am neither accepting nor rejecting this proposal at this time.

> Perhaps include_debug_symbols true.

Some ports already offer a debug variant to do this. Just as we've standardized 
the universal variant in MacPorts, we could decide to standardize the debug 
variant as the way to do this.


> This ought to have three effects
> (a) include -g
> (b) exclude strip(1)

How would that be accomplished?

> (c) port specific changes at their option
> 
> this ought not to change optimization or related.



Reply via email to