On Sunday 19 August 2007, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > On Sunday 19 August 2007, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > > For such a package I don't know useful things the debuginfo rpm might
> > > ever have. Why don't you just disable it entirely?
> >
> > That's probably an ok approach. But with debuginfo packages disabled,
> > rpmbuild does not strip all the binaries which it does with them enabled,
> > so people may want to strip executables and shared libs explicitly during
> > build if the symbols are not useful.
>
> /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip is run when find-debuginfo.sh isn't.
Yes, but unlike find-debuginfo.sh, that one does not strip shared libraries
and the like - there's a "grep -v ' shared object,'" in it which explicitly
skips them. I haven't checked if there are other differences eg. in handling
of executable bits, write permissions, setuid/setgid bits etc.
> > > %define _enable_debug_packages 0
> >
> > That does not disable debuginfo packages for me (F7 x86_64). This does:
> >
> > %define debug_package %{nil}
>
> Bah. Wonders of rpm spec conditionals. Is there an %undef? Maybe the
> actual rpm wizards involved in setting up the current macro scheme could
> say what the preferred method is.
I think it's the one I posted.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
