From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs-20101122 windows binaries Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:00:16 +0800 Message-ID: <874ob7tzlr.fsf@home.jasonrumney.net> References: <8762vpj9ep.fsf@gmail.com> <87d3pwt759.fsf@home.jasonrumney.net> <871v6cjagz.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1290553252 31636 80.91.229.12 (23 Nov 2010 23:00:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 23:00:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Sean Sieger Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 24 00:00:48 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PL1qx-0003we-JZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 00:00:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40776 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PL1qw-0000Bz-Qu for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:00:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=55685 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PL1qi-0000Am-Mf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:00:43 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PL1qa-0000B6-Ca for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:00:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-gy0-f169.google.com ([209.85.160.169]:64962) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PL1qa-0000B0-AA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 18:00:24 -0500 Original-Received: by gyg10 with SMTP id 10so3105069gyg.0 for ; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:00:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:received:from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent :mime-version:content-type; bh=9dSKzU8sv2Ox+Eh2iOqWvOpjiUEQqksXIJ3swDfzmrg=; b=bvJ4SHWyF8HsQgOa+mu9m0/ZpZAtdTA7fvHu7uCjsyYXAeBD92zgKD+RjGfHfhZU2N XsyIwEK9TJx/yzA/JSrs0N1/z7nE+ItFz5xysoQMQ36DFRLXMj/J+YrqhZQscjUF7UH7 eT3A45dc3e09/GZ7MXxA7X4PKQcnwWv46b6vk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; b=hT+UaZV3jJrIwgmRVtVyT/QMVw26+Pl1qIahVr8F84LfkG29rPU0W0r7klSdBfhKmn JQHNPQDHQix3z7qsqDslDJTKGZfpWgujgnGw2WYMlK06GpEAySMNXSZGWvHFNHudvP2K erqe21O2OraPmsOuJIjtnGq2DdiWYfERbnWfc= Original-Received: by 10.150.204.4 with SMTP id b4mr12455501ybg.415.1290553222956; Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:00:22 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from home.jasonrumney.net ([120.140.38.27]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id q8sm625278ybk.12.2010.11.23.15.00.20 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:00:21 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by home.jasonrumney.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4EF821B9F; Wed, 24 Nov 2010 07:00:16 +0800 (MYT) In-Reply-To: <871v6cjagz.fsf@gmail.com> (Sean Sieger's message of "Tue, 23 Nov 2010 11:01:00 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:133098 Archived-At: Sean Sieger writes: > Jason Rumney writes: > > I guess no debug info has been included (probably not a good idea for > snapshots). > > My bad: > > - Snapshots should or should not include debug info? > - Pretests should or should not include debug info? Snapshots and Pretests are primarily for testing, so including debug info is essential. > - Releases should or should not include debug info? In my experience, users complain (still in 2010) about the size of the binary if it changes drastically between releases. So shipping without debug info avoids such complaints at the expense that bugs are harder to debug (but most users that would be willing to debug for you will be using the snapshots or willing to build from source anyway).