Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 21:03:22 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: ports@FreeBSD.org, Tijl Coosemans <tijl@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Martin Wilke <miwi@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: INSTALL_TARGET=install-strip runs into "permission denied" Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.21.1704242101550.2928@anthias.pfeifer.com> In-Reply-To: <20170423123757.5f111189@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> References: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1501181210570.2527@tuna.site> <20150118130127.71b8cba9@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <alpine.LSU.2.11.1501182140060.2527@tuna.site> <20150119092404.0a448f9f@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <alpine.LSU.2.21.1704222137060.2928@anthias.pfeifer.com> <20170423123757.5f111189@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 23 Apr 2017, Tijl Coosemans wrote: >> [ https://reviews.freebsd.org/D10357 ] > Yes, but in my opinion we should stop relying on upstream build systems > to get stripping right and let bsd.port.mk strip ELF files after staging. > It's less work for maintainers. Then instead of stripping, bsd.port.mk > could also extract debug symbols into separate files and put them into a > debug subpackage. Yes, that sounds a lot more reliable and maintainable (and overall less work compared to patching hundreds of ports). Until something like this is in place, should we ignore those complaints from the QA framework or patch individual ports? Gerald
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LSU.2.21.1704242101550.2928>