Bug 27351 - please add a debugedit binary to elfutils
Summary: please add a debugedit binary to elfutils
Status: RESOLVED OBSOLETE
Alias: None
Product: elfutils
Classification: Unclassified
Component: tools (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2021-02-05 11:25 UTC by Matthias Klose
Modified: 2021-04-26 16:19 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Last reconfirmed:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Matthias Klose 2021-02-05 11:25:05 UTC
please consider adding a debugedit binary to elfutils. Currently this is shipped within the rpm sources, however distribution as a separate tool would also benefit people not requiring rpm, like https://bugs.debian.org/981245
Comment 1 Dmitry V. Levin 2021-02-05 13:28:55 UTC
I second this.

The only technical complication I see is that debugedit uses Autotest for testing while the rest of elfutils uses tests driven by Automake.
Comment 2 christian.morales.vega 2021-02-05 16:10:02 UTC
I would like that, and more. I would like something doing everything rpm/debugedit do so I can run something similar to

./extract_debuginfo_to_use_with_debuginfod -d <my_staging_dir>

So debugedit + find-debuginfo.sh + https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/commit/bbfe1f86b2e4b5c0bd499d9f3dd9de9c9c20fff2

If I could

./extract_debuginfo_to_use_with_debuginfod -d <staging_dir> -u <my_debuginfod_server>

to directly extract+upload the debug information to my debuginfod server it would be my ideal workflow.
Comment 3 Mark Wielaard 2021-02-18 12:50:54 UTC
We should obviously discuss with the rpm maintainers. But I think it might actually be easier to have debugedit be its own project, just like e.g. dwz is. Then it can have its own release schedule and the build setup can be small and easy. Using autoconf autotests will then also be more natural.

And should it just be debugedit itself or also the find-debuginfo.sh script that rpm ships. That one is more integrated/tied to rpm at the moment. But might also be useful independently.

If debugedit (and possibly find-debuginfo.sh) would be released independently of rpm then making sure things keep being compatible is really important. We'll probably need to add a buildbot that builds/tests the project together for that.

But first we need to know what the rpm maintainers think of this idea. It would probably be a good idea to raise this on the http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-ecosystem mailinglist.
Comment 4 Martin Liska 2021-02-19 08:15:42 UTC
Note that The Rpm-ecosystem Archives is likely out of date, the latest month is "June 2020".
I would rather create an issue here:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues
Comment 5 Panu Matilainen 2021-02-19 12:20:47 UTC
Us rpm maintainers are all +100 for splitting debugedit out of rpm, it's only there for historical reasons and would be better off directly maintained closer to home with other ELF tooling.

rpm-ecosystem may be quiet but is fine for purposes of discussion. GitHub ticket would be just painful as Mark is not on GH.
Comment 7 Mark Wielaard 2021-04-26 16:19:04 UTC
Now that there is a separate debugedit project https://sourceware.org/debugedit I think we can close this elfutils bug.