Marcus Brinkmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You might want to add a warning that this needs to be tested. Some
> packages, like glibc or the Hurd, can not be built without optimization
> (for example because of inline functions not being inlined).
It should be pointed out that this fact repre
On Mon, 2002-08-19 at 20:35, Richard Braakman wrote:
> Note that many packages don't currently do this. I often had to do
> horrible things to Makefiles to get a binary with debugging symbols.
> I speak in past tense because I usually don't bother to do this anymore.
> So listen up, maintainers:
On 18 Aug 2002 20:18:43 -0400,
Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> + Although binaries in the build tree should be compiled with
> + debugging information by default,
How can I do it without wasting autobuilder's CPU time?
--
Oohara Yuuma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Debian developer
PG
On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 02:00:41PM +0900, Oohara Yuuma wrote:
> On 18 Aug 2002 20:18:43 -0400,
> Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > + Although binaries in the build tree should be compiled with
> > + debugging information by default,
> How can I do it without wasting autobuilder's
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Oohara Yuuma) writes:
> On 18 Aug 2002 20:18:43 -0400,
> Colin Walters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > + Although binaries in the build tree should be compiled with
> > + debugging information by default,
> How can I do it without wasting autobuilder's CPU time?
Don't w
subscribe
6 matches
Mail list logo
