[pkg-boost-devel] removing libboost-dbg

[Steve M. Robbins]

On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 11:36:43PM +0200, Domenico Andreoli wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 04:16:54PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote:
> > Hi Domenico,
> 
> hi,
> 
> > Is removing the separate debug package really wise?  That puts an
> > extra 200MB onto any system with all the boost libs.  
> > 
> > The split of non-debug and debugging libraries is quite widely
> > practice; e.g. "dpkg --list '*dbg'" shows 368 examples on my system.
> 
> debug variants of boost are not binary compatible with non-debug. if
> you want to use them, you need to choose them at link time.

Oh, right; because of the lib name "-d" decorations.  I hadn't
thought of that.  As you say below, then a "-dbg-dev" is required
to link against them.

An alternative solution is to consider the "-dbg" package as the
development package and include the link-time library files, too.

 
> libboost-dbg package had not sense, it was not usable at all.
> 
> -dbg package for every libboost-* library is required, as well as its
> -dbg-dev. 

Perhaps; the single -dbg was a compromise between doubling the number
of packages or doubling the size of each lib package.  But if you
truly need a -dbg-dev, you could create a single such package 
to go along with the single -dbg, no?


> i did not want to pass throught NEW queue now.

I'm not sure it makes sense to have design decisions driven by whether
or not a NEW package is created.  If the -dbg-dev package is the
correct decision, then I think we should just create it.  

Besides, the packages have a new SONAME and have to go through NEW
anyway, don't they?

Regards,
-Steve
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-boost-devel/attachments/20070806/b6d07f86/attachment.pgp