Re: egcs build report

["Rask Ingemann Lambertsen" <rask at kampsax dot k-net dot dk>]

Den 19-Jun-98 03:55:07 skrev Joe Buck fĝlgende om "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.

Binary distributions (assuming that they exist for your particular target)
aren't always compiled with exactly the options that you'd like. For example,
GeekGadget Amiga/m68k snapshots are compiled with -m68000 to support even the
lowest end of the Amiga range but an 68060 owner would likely want a -m68060
compiled version for the sake of compilation speed.

>> 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.  

I still have to pay for the disk space on my home system. Some of us have
quotas (on say unversity accounts). I do think it's a problem.

Regards,

/ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻTŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ\
| Rask Ingemann Lambertsen       | E-mail: mailto:rask@kampsax.k-net.dk  |
| Registered Phase5 developer    | WWW: http://www.gbar.dtu.dk/~c948374/ |
| A4000, 775 kkeys/s (RC5-64)    | "ThrustMe" on XPilot, ARCnet and IRC  |
|    The impossible is only something that hasn't happened to you yet.   |