Re: LYNX-DEV Is this the cost of doing the web?

[Michael Ritzert]

> 
> > 
> > >Is lynx just going to continue growing like this?  
> > 
> >     Almost certainly it will, as practically all software does;
> > there's little or no pressure to *remove* features, but there's plenty
> > to add them.  And what features get removed?
> > 
> >     On the other hand, debugging info takes a lot of space; 1.2Mb
> > on my Linux system.  Perhaps strip on Solaris has a command-line
> > argument to make it remove only part of the debugging info, leaving
> > enough to get a stack trace from a core dump.
> the default compiler options already do that.  we're picking up the -g
> because someone decided (in the autoconf tool ;-) that everyone should
> have -g for gcc unless it's overridden.  (I consider it a nuisance, myself,
> since no one seriously will _ever_ install production code with -g).  However,
> filtering it out of the CFLAGS is also a nuisance.  (I've done it on some
> packages, probably should do it for Lynx as well).

It would be great if the installation instructions contained a note how to 
override this autoconf nuisance, if possible, in a general way, thus allowing
us to specify compiler flags optimised for the specific target information. 

Please don't point me to the autoconf docs now --- autoconf's intention has
been to provide a procedure as simple as possible to generate production
code.  And having to install the autoconf package to be able to read into
the gory details in order to be able to do something as common as supplying
customised compiler options is IMHO just the opposite of this intention.

Michael Ritzert

;
; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.
;