Re: Open items

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > I think I have a compromise for --enable-debug:  How about if
> > --enable-debug removes optimization, adds -g (or -g3 for macro debugging
> > symbols in gcc), and maybe even enables casserts.
> 
> This strikes me as a completely arbitrary set of changes in
> long-established behavior.  People who want to turn off optimization
> already know how to do it, and people who want asserts already know

How do you do it?  CFLAGS="" configure?

> how to do that.  Eliminating the functional difference between these
> --enable options isn't a step forward.

I was looking for something that would be a middle ground, and I thought
a super-debug binary might to it.  I do think we should consider -g3 for
gcc.  I didn't know it existed, and it does seem nice.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073