Hi Nikolaus Rath wrote: > On Aug 24 2015, Sebastian Ramacher <sramac...@debian.org> wrote: >> What's the plan for python(3)-*-dbg packages that include both Python >> extensions >> built for the python-dbg interpreter and debug symbols? Should they also >> change >> their Section to something else? > > > .. and will they also be build automatically? Or rather, when relying on > the automatic building, will they include the extension for the debug > interpreter or just the debugging symbols for all extensions (built for > debugging and regular interpreter)?
The question is also valid for python2: When using dh --with python2 *and* build-depending on python-all-dbg, I'm getting [1]: * Some files like /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/*.debug * Some files like /usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/rrdtool.x86_64-linux-gnu_d.so Am I correct in assuming that this need to be split? * Each arch:any binary package will get its own -dbgsym package, like python-rrdtool-dbgsym_1.5.4-6_amd64.deb, lua-rrd-dbgsym_1.5.4-6_amd64.deb, ... * The python debug $(arch)_d.so generated by dh_auto_build will need its own package. (See questions of Nikolaus and Sebastian). The main question is whether or not these -dbgsym package is only of debug symbols. Assuming this is split, should one make a recommends: towards these non-main packages? Finally, if the current -dbg packages are moved out of main, either the buildd's will need to have them in their source list, or the section of the python tools to generate the debug _d.so thingies need to be changed. [1] https://packages.debian.org/sid/amd64/rrdtool-dbg/filelist -- Nirgal
