Re: emacs-20101122 windows binaries

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Lennart Borgman <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 22:10:59 +0100
> 
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 10:07 PM, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> From: Lennart Borgman <address@hidden>
> >> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 21:57:39 +0100
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> >> From: Lennart Borgman <address@hidden>
> >> >> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 20:56:11 +0100
> >> >> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Because it's pointless.  If we want to give users release binaries
> >> >> >> > with debug info, we should just ship such a binary, period.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Please explain why you think that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I just did, above.
> >> >>
> >> >> In what way is "pointless" an explanation?
> >> >
> >> > I meant the second sentence.
> >>
> >> Can you then explain if you think there is any reason not to ship the
> >> release binaries with debug info?
> >
> > I said it is slightly better, that's all.  The reason is disk space,
> > of course: 30MB is a lot for a binary.
> 
> Why do you then think it is pointless to ship both binaries with debug
> info and without it?

It should be clear: it's even more disk space waste.