Commit e7295f3e authored by Mo Zhou's avatar Mo Zhou

rules: Improve the reasoning about why sys.so should not be stripped.

parent 2032544f
......@@ -161,10 +161,18 @@ override_dh_fixperms:
-a -exec sed -i -e 's@#!/usr/bin/env julia@#!/usr/bin/julia@g' '{}' \; \
-a -exec chmod +x '{}' \; -print \)
# Don't strip sys.so and libjulia.so.* as suggested upstream.
# Don't strip sys.so and libjulia.so.* to keep the sanity of this program.
# https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/23115#issuecomment-320715030
# 1. stripping sys.so would cause "backtrace" test failure.
# 2. not stripping libjulia.so* would improve the results of the backtrace.
# 1. stripping sys.so will make julia behave differently from what official
# document says. stacktrace() won't trace into .jl files in base/stdlib.
# That's because sys.so is compiled from .jl files instead of C/C++
# sources and stripping sys.so results in the loss of debugging information
# on .jl files. Julia interpreter itself is more likely a machine code
# generator built upon LLVM, it is really not a good idea to delete
# debugging information about Julia's core .jl files and confuse our
# users. See: https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1.0.0/manual/stacktraces/
# 2. stripping sys.so would cause "backtrace" test failure.
# 3. not stripping libjulia.so* would improve the results of the backtrace.
override_dh_strip:
dh_strip -X"sys.so" -X"libjulia.so.1.0"
......
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment