On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 03:11:58PM +0200, Evan Penner wrote: > > >> I would personally prefer that most packages come with debugging > enabled > > >> by > > >> default. Surely, there will be a performance cost, but speed is not > > >> crucial in > > >> most cases. > > >> > > >> Cheers, > > >> > > > > > > There's no performance impact, just disk space and bandwidth. > > > > > > > Bandwidth is probably the main problem, although anyone who wants to > debug > > will probably be fine with that. > > I think you guys misunderstood me. The biggest problem IMHO with building > debug > versions locally is not compiling itself, but setting up the environment. > So, I > meant that packages come with debugging enabled (compiled with gcc -O0 -g > and > perhaps ./configure options). This way, there will be not many new > packages. > > Of course, this is not a good idea for things like FF/Gnome/KDE because of > a > slow-down, but a performance penalty for smaller programs like vim, links, > XFCE4 etc. will not be noticeable (at least I don't see any for a > self-compiled > xfce4 desktop on a single-core Intel Atom based netbook). > Right, I got it now. So ideally, you'd want all packages to come with debug flags enabled? I see how that would cause performance issues in larger applications, I understand however the concern for those packages. The problem is performance as you said. However, creating a new repository would increase the Arch database by twofold. This is a concept the devs will have to take a look at. For now, I guess, your only option is to compile them yourself.
