Sorry but I disagree here. For a user who only wants to debug his own program debugging symbols in the libraries are not needed.
I'd prefer to have several packages: checker-bin, checker-libs, checker-dbg or something like that. Remember, we do not distribute debugging symbols in other libraries for the same reason. Instead we provide an *-dbg package. What do others think about this? Michael -- Dr. Michael Meskes, Projekt-Manager | topsystem Systemhaus GmbH [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Europark A2, Adenauerstr. 20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 52146 Wuerselen Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44 Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10 >-----Original Message----- >From: Ben Pfaff [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, June 19, 1997 10:25 PM >To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org; Michael Meskes >Subject: Re: checker libs with debugging symbols > >Michael Meskes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Is there a reason for the checker libraries to come with debugging symbols? > >Yes. There is a good, even a superlatively good reason: checker is >for debugging programs. It is *only* for debugging programs. Thus, >debugging symbols are in there intentionally. When something goes >wrong, even in the C library, it helps an enormous amount if one can >find the exact line in the source that causes the problem. >Regrettably, one must have 300MB of source code online in order to do >this, but that is the price we pay. > >> I haven't used checker yet, so I don't know. But I assume that the >>libraries >> without debugging symbols would work. > >They would work. But it isn't The Right Thing To Do. >-- >Ben Pfaff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.msu.edu/user/pfaffben >PGP key: http://www.msu.edu/user/pfaffben/pgp.html or a keyserver near you >Linux: choice of a GNU generation -- Debian GNU/Linux: the only free Linux -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
