[Bug 325193] New: Stripping of binaries

Do not reply to this via email (we are currently unable to handle email
responses and they get discarded).  You can add comments to this bug at
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325193
 GARNOME | general | Ver: unspecified

           Summary: Stripping of binaries
           Product: GARNOME
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: Linux
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: enhancement
          Priority: Normal
         Component: general
        AssignedTo: garnome-maint@...
        ReportedBy: mark@...
         QAContact: garnome-list@...
     GNOME version: Unspecified
   GNOME milestone: Unspecified


I was reading through gar.mk and noticed that stripping isn't yet implemented
in GAR. pkgmk from the CRUX distribution
(http://www.crux.nu/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/file/tools/pkgutils/trunk/pkgmk.in) does
this nicely. Search for strip_files() to see the magic.

An example ".nostrip" file has this content: ^usr/X11R6/lib/modules/.*$

There are only two such files in the entire distribution. The one above from
xorg and another one for glibc, so I consider the function pretty safe. In
general it seems to have a significant impact on package sizes, and with disks
usually being the biggest bottlenecks these days, I imagine that startup times
etc. would be equally increased.

Anyway, the gmake porting of it is so ugly that I'd be embarrassed to show it.
It would be nice if someone could do it properly.


--
Configure bugmail: http://bugzilla.gnome.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
--
garnome-list mailing list
garnome-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/garnome-list

[Myles Green]

You wrote:
Anyway, the gmake porting of it is so ugly that I'd be embarrassed to
show it. It would be nice if someone could do it properly.

As you know, garnome is a volunteer effort, if you have some patches
please feel free to contribute them. If you can't supply patches or
aren't willing to volunteer your time to implement this then comments
like you made are completely unnecessary and just plain rude. We need
contributors not 1337 types, so put up (your patches) or shut up.

Some people.... :-/
(I'll bet that his email address is bogus but who knows)

--
The whole world is a tuxedo and you are a pair of brown shoes.
                -- George Gobel
--
garnome-list mailing list
garnome-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/garnome-list

[Mark Rosenstand-3]

On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 22:22 -0700, Myles Green wrote:

> You wrote:
> Anyway, the gmake porting of it is so ugly that I'd be embarrassed to
> show it. It would be nice if someone could do it properly.
>
> As you know, garnome is a volunteer effort, if you have some patches
> please feel free to contribute them. If you can't supply patches or
> aren't willing to volunteer your time to implement this then comments
> like you made are completely unnecessary and just plain rude. We need
> contributors not 1337 types, so put up (your patches) or shut up.
>
> Some people.... :-/

Thanks for the great feedback. While I really appreciate your positive
attitude and apparently contributions, I would like to point out that
the bug was filed with severity "enhancement" on request from someone
who matters.

The link suggested a way to implement this apparently (did you ever read
gar.mk?) missing feature, so I thought it'd be worth to point out.

I don't use GARNOME myself - I hang out in #garnome because of interest
in GAR.

> (I'll bet that his email address is bogus but who knows)

I wish it was if these are the comments you get. GNOME (and especially
GARNOME) is all about love, dude. Show us some :-)

--
garnome-list mailing list
garnome-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/garnome-list

[Myles Green]

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 07:34:10 +0100
Mark Rosenstand <mark@...> wrote:

> On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 22:22 -0700, Myles Green wrote:
> > You wrote:
> > Anyway, the gmake porting of it is so ugly that I'd be embarrassed
> > to show it. It would be nice if someone could do it properly.
> >
> > As you know, garnome is a volunteer effort, if you have some patches
> > please feel free to contribute them. If you can't supply patches or
> > aren't willing to volunteer your time to implement this then
> > comments like you made are completely unnecessary and just plain
> > rude. We need contributors not 1337 types, so put up (your patches)
> > or shut up.
> >
> > Some people.... :-/
>
> Thanks for the great feedback. While I really appreciate your positive
> attitude and apparently contributions, I would like to point out that
> the bug was filed with severity "enhancement" on request from someone
> who matters.
>
> The link suggested a way to implement this apparently (did you ever
> read gar.mk?) missing feature, so I thought it'd be worth to point
> out.
>
> I don't use GARNOME myself - I hang out in #garnome because of
> interest in GAR.
>
> > (I'll bet that his email address is bogus but who knows)
>
> I wish it was if these are the comments you get. GNOME (and especially
> GARNOME) is all about love, dude. Show us some :-)

Well, I do use garnome and have given some feedback but I wasn't nearly
as negative as you were - or did you think that was _positive_
feedback? From your comments I somehow got the idea you thought it was
an ugly hack. I also got the idea that you figured you could do a
better job, so I ask again where are your patches? As for reading
gar.mk, no, not in it's entirety. So what? My point was and still is
that you did not need to be so negative or rude. Why don't *you* show
the developers some love? C'mon dude, I know you can do it. :-)

If I've come on a little too strong tonight it's only because I've seen
three posts on as many different mailing lists that came across like
some smart-ass who figured that the work done on some very worthwhile
projects was all wrong and only they knew how it should be done. Oh and
not one of the three posters bothered to attach any patches. I'll be
the first one to admit that I am _not_ a programmer so the best I'll
ever be able to to is test and give 99.999% guaranteed friendly, usable
feedback.

Anyway, this is a waste of peoples bandwidth here on the list so if you
wish to carry this on Mark I suggest we take this off-list.

Regards, Myles
--
You will be recognized and honored as a community leader.
--
garnome-list mailing list
garnome-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/garnome-list

[Mark Rosenstand-3]

On Thu, 2005-12-29 at 01:36 -0700, Myles Green wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 07:34:10 +0100
> Mark Rosenstand <mark@...> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2005-12-28 at 22:22 -0700, Myles Green wrote:
> > > You wrote:
> > > Anyway, the gmake porting of it is so ugly that I'd be embarrassed
> > > to show it. It would be nice if someone could do it properly.
> > >
> > > As you know, garnome is a volunteer effort, if you have some patches
> > > please feel free to contribute them. If you can't supply patches or
> > > aren't willing to volunteer your time to implement this then
> > > comments like you made are completely unnecessary and just plain
> > > rude. We need contributors not 1337 types, so put up (your patches)
> > > or shut up.
> > >
> > > Some people.... :-/
> >
> > Thanks for the great feedback. While I really appreciate your positive
> > attitude and apparently contributions, I would like to point out that
> > the bug was filed with severity "enhancement" on request from someone
> > who matters.
> >
> > The link suggested a way to implement this apparently (did you ever
> > read gar.mk?) missing feature, so I thought it'd be worth to point
> > out.
> >
> > I don't use GARNOME myself - I hang out in #garnome because of
> > interest in GAR.
> >
> > > (I'll bet that his email address is bogus but who knows)
> >
> > I wish it was if these are the comments you get. GNOME (and especially
> > GARNOME) is all about love, dude. Show us some :-)
>
> Well, I do use garnome and have given some feedback but I wasn't nearly
> as negative as you were - or did you think that was _positive_
> feedback? From your comments I somehow got the idea you thought it was
> an ugly hack. I also got the idea that you figured you could do a
> better job, so I ask again where are your patches? As for reading
> gar.mk, no, not in it's entirety. So what? My point was and still is
> that you did not need to be so negative or rude. Why don't *you* show
> the developers some love? C'mon dude, I know you can do it. :-)
>
> If I've come on a little too strong tonight it's only because I've seen
> three posts on as many different mailing lists that came across like
> some smart-ass who figured that the work done on some very worthwhile
> projects was all wrong and only they knew how it should be done. Oh and
> not one of the three posters bothered to attach any patches. I'll be
> the first one to admit that I am _not_ a programmer so the best I'll
> ever be able to to is test and give 99.999% guaranteed friendly, usable
> feedback.
>
> Anyway, this is a waste of peoples bandwidth here on the list so if you
> wish to carry this on Mark I suggest we take this off-list.

It seems it's all been a misunderstanding. Currently, there is no strip
target in GAR (or there is, but it will only tell you that it isn't
implemented yet.) That's why I suggested this way to do it, as "not
implemented yet" implies that they want to implement it but haven't
figured out how yet. ("They" probably being Nick Mofit & Co. and not the
GARNOME developers, but I bet all are interrested in smaller packages
and speed boosts.)

The big misunderstanding is that when I wrote:

"Anyway, the gmake porting of it is so ugly that I'd be embarrassed to
show it. It would be nice if someone could do it properly."

... I was talking of the way *I* had tried to convert it from sh to
make. In other words: "I tried to do it, but it's too ugly to publish."

So it seems we all love each other anyway :-)

In this case it was just a misunderstanding, but in general, if you're
concerned about people's bandwidth, don't send hate mail to bug reports
and avoid CC'ing the mailing list.

--
garnome-list mailing list
garnome-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/garnome-list

[Myles Green]

On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 10:04:03 +0100
Mark Rosenstand <mark@...> wrote:

> It seems it's all been a misunderstanding. Currently, there is no
> strip target in GAR (or there is, but it will only tell you that it
> isn't implemented yet.) That's why I suggested this way to do it, as
> "not implemented yet" implies that they want to implement it but
> haven't figured out how yet. ("They" probably being Nick Mofit & Co.
> and not the GARNOME developers, but I bet all are interrested in
> smaller packages and speed boosts.)

nod. I see your point.
 
> The big misunderstanding is that when I wrote:
>
> "Anyway, the gmake porting of it is so ugly that I'd be embarrassed to
> show it. It would be nice if someone could do it properly."
>
> ... I was talking of the way *I* had tried to convert it from sh to
> make. In other words: "I tried to do it, but it's too ugly to
> publish."

oh... I certainly did misunderstand you. Though you have to agree that
the fault is/was not entirely mine - you weren't very clear on that.

> So it seems we all love each other anyway :-)

Aw shucks ;)
 
> In this case it was just a misunderstanding, but in general, if you're
> concerned about people's bandwidth, don't send hate mail to bug
> reports and avoid CC'ing the mailing list.

No, that was frustration, certainly not hate mail. There's way too much
hate going on in this world already...

Peace, Love, Goodwill.

Myles
--
How apt the poor are to be proud.
                -- William Shakespeare, "Twelfth-Night"
--
garnome-list mailing list
garnome-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/garnome-list

If you have any questions why you received this email, please see the text at
the end of this email. Replies to this email are NOT read, please see the text
at the end of this email. You can add comments to this bug at:
  http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325193

  GARNOME | general | Ver: unspecified

Luca Cappelletti (Infodomestic.com) changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |luca.cappelletti@...




------- Comment #1 from Luca Cappelletti (Infodomestic.com)  2009-01-20 08:57 UTC -------
to workaround to this issue usually I run a scan into the $prefix/bin to strip
all binaries after the garnome installation and it works very well for me


--
See http://bugzilla.gnome.org/page.cgi?id=email.html for more info about why you received
this email, why you can't respond via email, how to stop receiving
emails (or reduce the number you receive), and how to contact someone
if you are having problems with the system.

You can add comments to this bug at http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=325193.
--
garnome-list mailing list
garnome-list@...
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/garnome-list