Bug#810327: perl: move to dbgsym packages

Niels Thykier niels at thykier.net
Fri Apr 15 06:26:21 UTC 2016


Niko Tyni:
> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 12:55:10PM +0200, Niko Tyni wrote:
>> Package: perl
>> Version: 5.22.1-3
>> Severity: wishlist
>>
>> Detached debugging symbols are moving to a separate archive suite.
>>
>>  https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2015/12/msg00262.html
>>
>> We should migrate the symbols in perl-debug as well.

Seems reasonable, though please note that you will probably want to keep
*non*-debug symbols in perl-debug (e.g. the perl debugger)

> 
> So we can't use "automatic -dbgsym packages" as provided by debhelper,
> as we have a long standing tradition of trying to avoid needing perl
> (and hence debhelper) to build perl.
> 
I am a bit curious about this.  AFAICT several essential packages (now?)
use debhelper (incl. coreutils, gzip, tar and dpkg - not to mention
glibc).  So I do not see how you can get to compile perl without needing
perl (before even getting to perl)?

Not saying you should use debhelper; I just wanted to challenge the
statement a bit to see if it still makes sense. :)

> Seems like the easiest way to implement this manually is to put -dbgsym
> packages in debian/control just like regular ones.

I think you might need to *omit* them from debian/control.

> My reading of the
> DAK code (at https://ftp-master.debian.org/git/dak.git/) indicates we
> just need to name them perl-dbgsym etc., and declare
> 
>  Section: debug
>  Auto-Built-Package: debug-symbols.
> 
> to get them to go in the debug suite (and bypass NEW processing et al.)
> 
> Cc'ing Ansgar, who implemented the DAK side, and Niels, who I understand
> designed this whole thing. Is the above correct, or are there other
> restrictions? Would we be misusing a private interface between debhelper
> and DAK, or are other implementations welcome?
> 
> The "Auto-Built-Package" part makes me a bit uncomfortable, it would be
> sort of a lie. Is that a problem?
> 

Assuming you omit the package from debian/control, it would no longer be
a lie! :)

Thanks,
~Niels


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/perl-maintainers/attachments/20160415/64bb3f11/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the Perl-maintainers mailing list