Re: --enable-debug vs --enable-symbols (Re: [Libreoffice-commits] .: 12 commits - config_host.mk.in configure.in filter/source oox/source sal/inc sc/source solenv/gbuild toolkit/source xmlhelp/source)

On Tuesday 22 of May 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> On 05/22/2012 03:19 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > On Monday 21 of May 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> > > On 05/21/2012 05:10 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> > > > On Friday 18 of May 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
> > > > > Ah, you wanted --enable-dbgutil to disable -O2, the same way that
> > > > > --enable-debug does.  Had missed that point.  Hm, as I said, I prefer
> > > > > my --enable-dbgutil --disable-debug builds to be -O2.
> > > >
> > > >    What is the point of that combination? As far as I can tell
> > > > --enable-dbgutil is like --enable-debug but for changes that are BIC,
> > > > so only dbgutil without debug does not make much sense to me.
> > >
> > > I rarely use a debugger to step through code, so I prefer to avoid the
> > > --enable-debug settings that, AFAIU, are mainly there to aid in
> > > step-through debugging, but nevertheless cause potential deviation from
> > > a production build (like -O0, -fno-inline).
> >
> >   But --enable-debug also enables asserts, logging and similar
> > functionality that should be rather useful for developer builds, doesn't
> > it?
>
> But --enable-dbgutil enables that as well (and more of it).

 Uhm? If that is the case, then no wonder people get confused, since this 
means that dbgutil is a superset of debug, except not quite. I've already 
asked Michael, so I'm going to ask you too: What is your idea about what 
these options do?

-- 
 Lubos Lunak
 l.lunak@suse.cz