This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: make install-strip with binutils
- From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald at pfeifer dot com>
- To: Ralf Wildenhues <Ralf dot Wildenhues at gmx dot de>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, binutils at sourceware dot org, gdb-patches at sourceware dot org, NightStrike <nightstrike at gmail dot com>
- Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 01:24:13 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: make install-strip with binutils
- References: <AANLkTim3U0h2Orq0k=35f1EH4UDrVuY1aeQMy7V1o9E6@mail.gmail.com> <20101023095951.GN2183@gmx.de> <AANLkTiksfrMeF7=U3ie6-vom6arKdc8O0qNkABvYuZAm@mail.gmail.com> <mcrhbgcub27.fsf@google.com> <alpine.LFD.2.00.1010240455210.15889@eddie.linux-mips.org> <20101027182939.GI15343@gmx.de> <AANLkTikDnZA17jMXbEEX6oLezYKHDm-LZxuXifxdbQCo@mail.gmail.com> <20101102200841.GG4123@gmx.de> <20101117190145.GE12746@gmx.de>
On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> Now, as GCC build maintainer, it seems most of this patch is free to
> proceed on (still, I'd welcome any review!), and the src bits are
> trivial. The web update has been OKed off-list by Gerald, so the only
> remaining bits are in gcc/doc/install.texi. Is that part of the build
> maintainer role too, or OK to go ahead with?
I can approve that one, too. :-)
There is one thing there that may confuse our users a bit and that is
the following:
+ You can let installed programs and libraries be stripped with
+
+@smallexample
+make install-strip
+@end smallexample
This could be misread as stripping already installed programs and
libraries, where I assume this installs stripped copies. If this
is correct, would you mind adjusting this before committing your
patch? Something like "You can install stripped..." perhaps?
Gerald