> It's unfortunately fairly hard for lintian to do this since lintian checks
> one package at a time and would need to do cross-package checking to match
> up the binaries with the -dbg package.
Ah right, darn.
I guess it could at least do some sanity checks on the value of
".gnu_debuglink" but
Matt Taggart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That check is good, but what I was thinking with the original bug is that
> you should check the binaries for the ".gnu_debuglink" and make sure that
> what it's pointing at exists and is in the right place in the -dbg package.
It's unfortunately fairl
forgot to cc the bug..
> On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 23:24 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 20:08 -0800, Matt Taggart wrote:
> > > binutils and gdb now have support for putting debugging info into a separ
> ate
> > > file. So you build things debugable and you get a
On Tue, 2008-06-24 at 23:24 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 20:08 -0800, Matt Taggart wrote:
> > binutils and gdb now have support for putting debugging info into a
> > separate
> > file. So you build things debugable and you get a separate file with all
> > the
>
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-03-14 at 20:08 -0800, Matt Taggart wrote:
> binutils and gdb now have support for putting debugging info into a separate
> file. So you build things debugable and you get a separate file with all the
> debugging info and a normal binary that contains a pointer to this info. This
Package: lintian
Version: 1.23.8
Severity: wishlist
binutils and gdb now have support for putting debugging info into a separate
file. So you build things debugable and you get a separate file with all the
debugging info and a normal binary that contains a pointer to this info. This
is really c
6 matches
Mail list logo
