This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the elfutils project.
Re: MiniDebugInfo support
- From: Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>
- To: elfutils-devel at lists dot fedorahosted dot org
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:32:59 +0100
- Subject: Re: MiniDebugInfo support
On Wed, 2012-11-14 at 13:57 +0100, Martin Milata wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 13:34:33 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-11-12 at 12:08 +0100, Martin Milata wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:08:41 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> > > > I am a little hesitant to add support for a feature that is not upstream
> > > > in any of the standard toolchain/distro tools, and apparently also not
> > > > used by any other distro than Fedora. Of course Fedora is often first,
> > > > but it would be good to get an idea who else is going to support this.
> > > > What is the reason upstream RPM and GDB haven't accepted this (yet)?
> > >
> > > That is entirely understandable. Regarding RPM, I don't know. I asked
> > > the author of the minidebuginfo proposal but he does not know either.
> > Probably best to just resubmit it and specifically ask for feedback.
> > If you have a pointer to the submission and reviews of the feature from
> > last time that would be appreciated.
> I asked the RPM package maintainer and the situation seems to be the
> same as here -- they don't want to merge it upstream until is more
> widely adopted/used.
Thanks for looking into this. It seems only gdb is working on
integrating this feature ATM. I'll want to wait and see how the
discussion unfolds there before adopting it for elfutils:
It looks like they are also writing a technical specification for the
feature, which would be very welcome, since at the moment I have to
guess at some of it (why are some of the ELF notes in the compressed ELF
for example, are you supposed to cross-check they match?)