large binary, why not strip ?

[Matthew Seaman]

Kris Kennaway wrote:
 
> Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most cases it
> will be a simple matter of changing the port's do-install: target to
> use INSTALL_* macros instead of cp/bsdtar etc.  This would be a good
> project to get some familiarity with the ports tree.

Would it be worthwhile to add a test and warning that all installed binaries
have not been stripped to the 'security-check' target in bsd.port.mk?  That's
not really what that target was intended for (feeping creaturism alert!) but
it's the obvious place to put such a test.

Probably cleaner to create a whole new target, but that's going to duplicate
some code.

Hmmmm... I shall work up some patches, probably over the weekend, so there's
something substantive to talk about.

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.                   7 Priory Courtyard
                                                  Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey     Ramsgate
                                                  Kent, CT11 9PW

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 258 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20081118/09e8a12f/signature.pgp