This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: egcs build report



> > Yes, we want -g included in the flags by default.
> 
> Why?
> 
> IMHO, this makes egcs more ``expensive'' in terms of disk space and
> build time, and I'd say that 99% of all _users_ will never use it. 

But those users will install binary distributions, which generally will
be built without -g.

> Could it make sense not to include -g for releases?

This has not traditionally done to help convey the sense that free
software/open source is not simply a freebie, it is an effort that people
can contribute to.

GNUware has always been done this way.  Considering that disk prices are
now about 1/100th of what they were when this policy began, I don't think
it's a problem.  

A compromise might be to include in the installation instructions "If
you're really short on disk space and not competent to help us debug,
do xyz".  Proper instruction should be given!  As g++ FAQ maintainer,
I don't want to suddenly get lots of mail from folks who can't debug
their code (because someone installed a libstdc++ with no debug symbols).


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]