From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50982)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1dxUKd-0004GI-3I
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:38:08 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1dxUKY-0002E1-6l
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:38:07 -0400
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55461)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
	(Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1dxUKY-0002Du-3K
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:38:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1dxUKX-0005B7-TD
	for guix-patches@gnu.org; Thu, 28 Sep 2017 04:38:01 -0400
Subject: [bug#28593] [PATCH] gnu: openfoam: Clean up to reduce closure.
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.28593.B28593.150658783519848@debbugs.gnu.org>
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
References: <20170925104459.17798-1-fx@gnu.org> <87fubbj5yr.fsf@gnu.org>
	<1506426036.2423.32.camel@tourbillion-technology.com>
	<873779hdci.fsf@gnu.org> <87efqrsubj.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 10:36:56 +0200
In-Reply-To: <87efqrsubj.fsf@albion.it.manchester.ac.uk> (Dave Love's message
	of "Wed, 27 Sep 2017 22:30:40 +0100")
Message-ID: <87lgkzz0bb.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
	<mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
	<mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Dave Love <fx@gnu.org>
Cc: 28593@debbugs.gnu.org, Paul Garlick <pgarlick@tourbillion-technology.com>

Dave Love <fx@gnu.org> skribis:

> Ludovic Court=C3=A8s <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> That=E2=80=99s because we use =E2=80=98--strip-debug=E2=80=99 and not =
=E2=80=98--strip-all=E2=80=99 (in some
>> cases, the latter breaks binaries in weird ways, hence the conservative
>> choice.)
>
> Is that something Guix-specific?  As far as I know, with rpm and dpkg,
> the binaries are always stripped, and I'm not aware of any problem with
> that.

I=E2=80=99m pretty sure I tried to default to =E2=80=9C--strip-all=E2=80=9D=
 instead of
=E2=80=9C--strip-debug=E2=80=9D and that some packages had problems with th=
at, I forgot
what it was.

Perhaps we should try to revisit this.

>>> =C2=A0Does adding a debug output achieve the effect of stripping the
>>> binaries?=C2=A0
>>
>> I don=E2=80=99t think it makes any difference.
>
> Right.
>
> Incidentally, you could save about half the size of the boost
> contribution to closures like this by separating the headers and the
> libraries, but there was some problem I don;t remember when I tried.

Too bad you don=E2=80=99t remember, it would be worth looking into that.

Ludo=E2=80=99.