On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 10:24:05AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-14 00:41:49 +1000]:
> > OK, I'll try to remember to restrip for sarge :)
>
> Perhaps the BTS could be a help in remembering this?
>
> Bob
Good idea :)
Drew
--
PGP public key available at ht
On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 10:24:05AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-14 00:41:49 +1000]:
> > OK, I'll try to remember to restrip for sarge :)
>
> Perhaps the BTS could be a help in remembering this?
>
> Bob
Good idea :)
Drew
--
PGP public key available at h
Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-14 00:41:49 +1000]:
> OK, I'll try to remember to restrip for sarge :)
Perhaps the BTS could be a help in remembering this?
Bob
pgpoGeZUVTmOR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-10-14 00:41:49 +1000]:
> OK, I'll try to remember to restrip for sarge :)
Perhaps the BTS could be a help in remembering this?
Bob
msg07487/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:09:00AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> But to answer your specific question, I don't see it as a big deal if
> you ship unstripped binaries in a package in unstable for a while. I
> think the important part is providing stripped binaries for sarge; so
> just be sure to
On Sat, 2002-10-12 at 23:19, Drew Parsons wrote:
> Why does policy ask us to strip binaries anyway? Is it merely to reduce
> storage and bandwidth costs?
Right. I think there will be a point in the future (probably 2-3 years
away at least though) though where we can just default to shipping
uns
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:30:35AM +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
>
> > Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
> > wishes to leave the symbols in?
>
> Sure. It's only a "should" in policy, not a "must", so it's ok not to
> strip.
>
OK, I guess I'll pack 'em back in
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:09:00AM -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
>
> But to answer your specific question, I don't see it as a big deal if
> you ship unstripped binaries in a package in unstable for a while. I
> think the important part is providing stripped binaries for sarge; so
> just be sure t
On Sat, 2002-10-12 at 23:19, Drew Parsons wrote:
> Why does policy ask us to strip binaries anyway? Is it merely to reduce
> storage and bandwidth costs?
Right. I think there will be a point in the future (probably 2-3 years
away at least though) though where we can just default to shipping
un
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 10:30:35AM +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
>
> > Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
> > wishes to leave the symbols in?
>
> Sure. It's only a "should" in policy, not a "must", so it's ok not to
> strip.
>
OK, I guess I'll pack 'em back in
Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
> wishes to leave the symbols in?
Why you not provide a -dbg version of your package? If someone has an
error and want to report this, he can install the -dbg version to get
non st
Drew Parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
>
> Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
> wishes to leave the symbols in?
Why you not provide a -dbg version of your package? If someone has an
error and want to report this, he can install the -dbg version to get
non st
Hi Drew!
You wrote:
> Why does policy ask us to strip binaries anyway? Is it merely to reduce
> storage and bandwidth costs?
Yes, afaik this is the only reason.
> Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
> wishes to leave the symbols in?
Sure. It's only a "should
Hi Drew!
You wrote:
> Why does policy ask us to strip binaries anyway? Is it merely to reduce
> storage and bandwidth costs?
Yes, afaik this is the only reason.
> Could someone please clarify if it's appropriate to respect upstream's
> wishes to leave the symbols in?
Sure. It's only a "should
Policy says binaries "should" (not "must") be stripped:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s11.1
"Note that by default all installed binaries should be stripped, either by
using the -s flag to install, or by calling strip on the binaries after they
have been copied into debian/
Policy says binaries "should" (not "must") be stripped:
http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-files.html#s11.1
"Note that by default all installed binaries should be stripped, either by
using the -s flag to install, or by calling strip on the binaries after they
have been copied into debian/
16 matches
Mail list logo
