o > Neither of those seem to me to have any o > bearing on a universal binary. That is: if -g or -O are useful, then o > they would be useful for all ports at all times, and not just in the o > +universal variants of some ports. o o You are absolutely right about the whole thing. I don't understand why o "-g -O" are used in the example. They could as well have added o "-funroll-loop -fanother-option etc." and hundreds other gcc flags o that are irrelevant to a universal build to confuse readers even more. Peering into the minds of Apple's documentation writers (I know, my eyes will be burned), there may be a reason for this. -O turns on optimization. The default is -O0 (no optimization), and there are libraries that actually fail when built that way. The compiler is designed and tested mostly at -O1, so Apple may know something we don't. As for -g, Tiger has debugging facilities that send information to Apple, and I could see this as providing hooks for Apple fetching that information. I am just speculating, but I would follow the TN unless given a reason to do otherwise. -- Sal smile. -------------- Salvatore Domenick Desiano Doctoral Candidate Robotics Institute Carnegie Mellon University