Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 18:46:28 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Experiences with FreeBSD 9.0-BETA2 Message-ID: <20111006014628.GB19960@dragon.NUXI.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1109261941050.882@multics.mit.edu> References: <201109260053.SAA25795@lariat.net> <201109260927.02540.jhb@freebsd.org> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1109261359100.882@multics.mit.edu> <201109262035.OAA17199@lariat.net> <CACqU3MUZ_ez-KMGVR33Aqz31i9cE%2BW7ANtvhqy3D%2BiPfroFpxA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.GSO.1.10.1109261941050.882@multics.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 07:48:23PM -0400, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > My recollection is that this is because kensmith forgot to take > 'makeoptions DEBUG=-g' out of GENERIC when branching stable/8, and no one > noticed until a couple of releases in, at which point it seemed consistent > with POLA to just keep it there. Unfortunately I am not having much luck > digging through mail archives trying to confirm that. > I don't remember whether the plan was to turn it off on stable/9 or not. When I split out the symbols from the kernel, the intention was to always build with -g so users would have the symbols to help debug reported problems. If one was running a stock release kernel, they are not needed as we know where to find them -- the intention was to have a kernel-symbols tarball that was an option install. I pretty strongly feel that -g should not be removed from stable/9's kernel configs. Otherwise we're more in the dark when folks report problems from tracking -STABLE. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111006014628.GB19960>