Message-Id:	<199910282305.TAA02148@rochester.rr.com>
X-Mailer:	exmh version 2.1.0 09/18/1999
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
cc:	leisner AT rochester DOT rr DOT com
Subject:	Re: -g vs -s
In-reply-to:	Your message of "Thu, 28 Oct 1999 16:01:41 EDT."
	<199910282001 DOT QAA26264 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
Date:	Thu, 28 Oct 1999 19:05:44 -0400
From:	"Marty Leisner" <leisner AT rochester DOT rr DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Can you do anything useful with a core dump (a minimal stack backtrace?)

If you can, don't strip.

If you can't, that's too bad, but you might as well strip...

Marty Leisner


DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> writes  on Thu, 28 Oct 1999 16:01:41 EDT
     > 
     > Should a lack of -g (or -g*) imply -s in a gcc link?  It seems to be a
     > FAQ, and the users should be able to specify "-g0" to untrigger the
     > "-s".

- Raw text -