On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 10:44:05PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I pinger vorlon on this on IRC. He suggested to get in touch with
> d-policy for this, explaining why OCaml libraries should be in our
> opinion be handled differently than other libraries. I argued with him
> that the reason why
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 07:51:41PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I've just commit a change to our policy which mandates the compilation
> of bytecode libraries with -g and forbid it for bytecode programs.
I pinger vorlon on this on IRC. He suggested to get in touch with
d-policy for this, exp
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 11:58:03AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> So, at the moment I'm tagging this bug report as wontfix, but diverting
> the more general question of "should we mandate inclusion of debugging
> symbols in OCaml bytecode libraries"? to the debian-ocaml-maint mailing
> list. On
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 09:25:34PM +1000, skaller wrote:
Is it still possible to use the debugger and get a backtrace etc
if there are no debugging symbols in these libraries?
Of course not, but this is not the point. Indeed, the same argument can
Ocaml Maint ML
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Asunto: Bug#415194: libextlib-ocaml-dev: No debugging information
[ Ob: debian-ocaml-maint, look at the end of this mail ]
tags 415194 + wontfix
thanks
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 06:55:27PM -0400, Ivan Jager wrote:
> The bytecode files are currently compiled with
On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 15:12 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> So, apparently, Julien's guess is right: it is indeed possible to link
> without debugging information OCaml objects which have been previously
> linked with debugging information.
Of course native code (I mean C) is just the same. Y
On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 14:47 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 09:25:34PM +1000, skaller wrote:
> > Is it still possible to use the debugger and get a backtrace etc
> > if there are no debugging symbols in these libraries?
>
> Of course not, but this is not the point. Inde
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 02:54:29PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote:
> OCaml libraries are static, so if there is a way to take a library
> compiled with -g and link a program with it that results in an
> executable without debugging symbols, then I think we should do that,
> because that means you woul
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 11:58:03AM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> [ Ob: debian-ocaml-maint, look at the end of this mail ]
>
> tags 415194 + wontfix
> thanks
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 06:55:27PM -0400, Ivan Jager wrote:
> > The bytecode files are currently compiled without debugging support
On Mon, Apr 9, 2007 at 14:47:40 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 09:25:34PM +1000, skaller wrote:
> > Is it still possible to use the debugger and get a backtrace etc
> > if there are no debugging symbols in these libraries?
>
> Of course not, but this is not the point
On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 09:25:34PM +1000, skaller wrote:
> Is it still possible to use the debugger and get a backtrace etc
> if there are no debugging symbols in these libraries?
Of course not, but this is not the point. Indeed, the same argument can
be made for C libraries, but for C libraries
On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 11:58 +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
[bytecode with debug?]
Is it still possible to use the debugger and get a backtrace etc
if there are no debugging symbols in these libraries?
If not .. it defeats an important use of these libraries for
people who do have a native code
[ Ob: debian-ocaml-maint, look at the end of this mail ]
tags 415194 + wontfix
thanks
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 06:55:27PM -0400, Ivan Jager wrote:
> The bytecode files are currently compiled without debugging support.
> This makes it hard to debug other code that might be called by it. Eg, a
> fun
Package: libextlib-ocaml-dev
Version: 1.5-6
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
The bytecode files are currently compiled without debugging support.
This makes it hard to debug other code that might be called by it. Eg, a
function passed to List.iter.
Since the standard libraries are compiled with debug
14 matches
Mail list logo
