On terça-feira, 25 de setembro de 2012 12.20.08, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> As far as I'm concerned, I welcome Thiago's patch.
An option has been added to configure: -no-strip or -strip=no
The default is still to strip release builds.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Arc
>
> There's no option to choose the behavior. You have to patch.
> Using the developer mode isn't an option.
>
Yes, there is. Either stripping by default or not. I do not see the reason
for changing default for now if a patch can add an option, and the packager
can use that. I was fine previously
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Fathi Boudra wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> >> That's incorrect. We (Debian/Ubuntu) apply a patch since ages to avoid
>> >> stripping.
>> >
>> > Why? It just works f
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> A patch that I pulled in Meego builds as well.
It lives on in Mer, too :)
http://gitweb.merproject.org/gitweb?p=mer-core/qt.git;a=blob;f=qt-4.8.0-Avoid-symbol-stripping-by-default.patch;h=577a3422096c2df3b0e841e8a193be228bce8e6a;hb=HEAD
___
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Fathi Boudra wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> >> That's incorrect. We (Debian/Ubuntu) apply a patch since ages to avoid
> >> stripping.
> >
> > Why? It just works fine on Harmattan and Ubuntu-arm using the debian
> tools.
> > It so
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> That's incorrect. We (Debian/Ubuntu) apply a patch since ages to avoid
>> stripping.
>
> Why? It just works fine on Harmattan and Ubuntu-arm using the debian tools.
> It sounds broken to fail /all/ the time. Such a buildsystem should really b
> That's incorrect. We (Debian/Ubuntu) apply a patch since ages to avoid
> stripping.
>
Why? It just works fine on Harmattan and Ubuntu-arm using the debian tools.
It sounds broken to fail /all/ the time. Such a buildsystem should really
be fixed, or the package file should use the relevant option
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> Hence, I do not personally consider your concern now valid. I think the
>> minor and major qualifiers as you introduced those, are in the opposite
>> order.
>
>
> To be fair, I have only seen this as a problem for Tizen so far. I have seen
>
>
> Hence, I do not personally consider your concern now valid. I think the
> minor and major qualifiers as you introduced those, are in the opposite
> order.
>
To be fair, I have only seen this as a problem for Tizen so far. I have
seen various builds with the debian and archlinux packagings (whi
>
> There's a huge difference between stripping the binaries and the format of
> the
> package. In one case, it's a minor nuisance to some that in no way prevents
> work from happening (there's a .gz) and it's quickly going away as
> technology
> improves.
>
> In the other, it's a major problem tha
On sábado, 15 de setembro de 2012 01.54.29, Laszlo Papp wrote:
> > I disagree and I think we ought to think more about them. Especially
> > since,
> > without my fix, they had to patch Qt.
>
> This is not what you tried to achieve with the tarball distribution even
> when packager(s) asked explicit
>
> I disagree and I think we ought to think more about them. Especially since,
> without my fix, they had to patch Qt.
>
This is not what you tried to achieve with the tarball distribution even
when packager(s) asked explicitely so. The packagers were not considered as
said they should all solve
On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 18.27.31, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> well, i disagree.
> if you want backtraces, not stripping some minor symbol tables doesn't
> buy you much; you need to force proper debug info on anyway.
> i also don't think that "end users" never build qt themselves. all
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 04:31:52PM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 16.25.46, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > I made it default to no-stripping.
> >
> > which i don't understand ...
>
> Simon's email:
>
> "I think that our default configure and make rule
On Fri, September 14, 2012 04:35:47 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 16.21.44, Thomas Senyk wrote:
> > On Fri, September 14, 2012 04:08:57 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > > I made it default to no-stripping.
> >
> > Why? Shouldn't stripping be the default?
>
> I do
On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 16.33.14, Robin Burchell wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Thomas Senyk
>
> wrote:
> > A argument for stripping as default:
> > A lot of people don't know what's the right thing to do in most cases ...
> > so
> The people building Qt generally know wh
On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 16.21.44, Thomas Senyk wrote:
> On Fri, September 14, 2012 04:08:57 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > I made it default to no-stripping.
>
> Why? Shouldn't stripping be the default?
I don't think it should, neither does Simon. But Lars, Ossi and you think it
shou
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Thomas Senyk
wrote:
> A argument for stripping as default:
> A lot of people don't know what's the right thing to do in most cases ... so
The people building Qt generally know what they're doing. Either
they're working on Qt (or things using Qt) - either case of w
On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 16.25.46, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > I made it default to no-stripping.
>
> which i don't understand ...
Simon's email:
"I think that our default configure and make rules should be tailored towards
developers deliberately building Qt from source, so IMHO
On Fri, September 14, 2012 04:08:57 PM Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 14.56.08, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > If it is, I'll instead add an option to configure that toggles the
> > > "nostrip" option in CONFIG.
> >
> > that would be preferable.
>
> Commit updat
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 04:08:57PM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 14.56.08, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > If it is, I'll instead add an option to configure that toggles the
> > > "nostrip" option in CONFIG.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > that would be preferabl
On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 14.56.08, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > If it is, I'll instead add an option to configure that toggles the
> > "nostrip" option in CONFIG.
> >
> >
>
> that would be preferable.
Commit updated.
I made it default to no-stripping.
The option does not apply to
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 10:05:03AM +0200, ext Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 05.15.42, simon.hausm...@nokia.com
> wrote:
> > I think in automake this is usually solved by make install not stripping and
> > then there being also a "make install-strip" target that in
On sexta-feira, 14 de setembro de 2012 05.15.42, simon.hausm...@nokia.com
wrote:
> I think in automake this is usually solved by make install not stripping and
> then there being also a "make install-strip" target that installs and
> strips.
cmake also produces a "install/strip" target. But I didn
roject.org] on behalf of
> ext Thiago Macieira [thiago.macie...@intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 22:21
> To: development@qt-project.org; releas...@qt-project.org
> Subject: [Development] Not stripping our binaries by default
>
> I was trying to make Qt 5 packages for Tizen w
t-project.org
Subject: [Development] Not stripping our binaries by default
I was trying to make Qt 5 packages for Tizen when I realised that the
automated build scripts that generate debuginfo packages were failing, saying
that our libraries are already stripped.
Turns out that qmake generates "
On Sep 13, 2012, at 11:21 PM, ext Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> On quinta-feira, 13 de setembro de 2012 20.57.58, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
>> Depends on who we're optimising for. If we don't strip by default we might
>> get lots of complaints from people compiling source packages on their own
>>
On quinta-feira, 13 de setembro de 2012 20.57.58, lars.kn...@nokia.com wrote:
> Depends on who we're optimising for. If we don't strip by default we might
> get lots of complaints from people compiling source packages on their own
> that wonder about huge binaries in release mode.
At this point, t
On Sep 13, 2012, at 10:21 PM, ext Thiago Macieira
wrote:
> I was trying to make Qt 5 packages for Tizen when I realised that the
> automated build scripts that generate debuginfo packages were failing, saying
> that our libraries are already stripped.
>
> Turns out that qmake generates "stri
I was trying to make Qt 5 packages for Tizen when I realised that the
automated build scripts that generate debuginfo packages were failing, saying
that our libraries are already stripped.
Turns out that qmake generates "strip --strip-unneeded" commands when in
release mode. There's a way to turn
30 matches
Mail list logo
