From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8187 invoked by alias); 20 Nov 2010 00:24:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 8162 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Nov 2010 00:24:22 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (HELO vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at) (128.131.111.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 00:24:15 +0000 Received: from acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (acrux.dbai.tuwien.ac.at [128.131.111.60]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by vexpert.dbai.tuwien.ac.at (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E7F71E053; Sat, 20 Nov 2010 01:24:10 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2010 00:24:00 -0000 From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Ralf Wildenhues cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, binutils@sourceware.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, NightStrike Subject: Re: make install-strip with binutils In-Reply-To: <20101117190145.GE12746@gmx.de> Message-ID: References: <20101023095951.GN2183@gmx.de> <20101027182939.GI15343@gmx.de> <20101102200841.GG4123@gmx.de> <20101117190145.GE12746@gmx.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (LNX 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg00281.txt.bz2 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