Hi,
| A quick look at packages.debian.org suggests glibc and ghc (the haskell
| compiler)
... if that is all then the empiricist in me considers the case closed!
touche ;) Profiling libraries of everything would be overkill, but gsl
seems as good a target as libc, IMAO.
| An alternative, would be to have a DEB_BUILD_OPTION that did as I
| suggested (resulting in a single package containing the
| profiling-enabled .a files, with filenames such that you could install
| them into /usr/lib without over-writing anything). That would be less
| convenient than a binary package to install, but easier than users
| having to futz around inside build systems.
How would I make debian/control conditional? Use configure? If not, it
will always see the entry and will want a package.
I'm not immediately sure; avoiding this sort of thing is another reason
to just make a -prof package and ship it ;-)
Also if it doesn't overwrite, you need to mod all your local Makefiles to
pick up the different version. Makes no sense to me.
Only in as much as changing -lgsl to -lgsl_p (which you need to do for
many uses of the libc-prof package - e.g. -lc_p -lm_p)
I don't see this being "easy". Now, if you feel volunteering your time and
preparing a tested patch ... Otherwise, I am afraid, it is so backburner
that I'd rather be honest with you and close it (as a non-believer in "nice
to have but will never be done before cows come home" wishlist bugs).
My tuit-supply is small, but I might scratch an itch in due course;
would you accept a "builds another package" version, or only a
"optionally builds just the -prof package" patch? NB I am not promising
anything!
The only compromise I can think of is to have a 'debug _and_ profile' static
build, but I guess you want 'no debug and profile' ?
I'd be happy with debug and profile, I think.
Thanks,
Matthew
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
