Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Dan Meltzer <parallelgrapefruit@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] fix binary debug support, part elevenity billion
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 18:27:57
Message-Id: 46059ce10601151025u2e736ff9re3263ba6ef3b81d3@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] fix binary debug support, part elevenity billion by Mike Frysinger
1 On 1/15/06, Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote:
2 > this topic has come up before too many times and has yet to be solved, and we
3 > have too many hacks in place
4 >
5 > the issues:
6 > - USE=debug is way too vague; sometimes it builds different code (i.e.
7 > additional runtime checks, debugging output, yada yada) and sometimes it
8 > forces debugging gcc flags into CFLAGS
9 > - debug.eclass: it sucks, we all know it, enough said
10 > - no easy way for users/developers to quickly emerge a package and have it
11 > contain useful debugging information, running `FEATURES=nostrip CFLAGS="-g
12 > -O" emerge booga` is petarded
13 >
14 > the one true solution:
15 > - USE=debug *never* changes CFLAGS or LDFLAGS or what have you, it *only*
16 > enables additional runtime code (such as assert()'s or helpful debug
17 > output) ... if you're confused by what i mean, run `USE=debug emerge nano`
18 > and then run `nano`
19 > - we add an emerge flag (say '--debug-build') which adds "nostrip" to FEATURES
20 > and auto sets CFLAGS to DEBUG_CFLAGS and LDFLAGS to DEBUG_LDFLAGS
21 > - portage will add sane debug defaults to make.globals (DEBUG_CFLAGS="-O -g"
22 > and DEBUG_LDFLAGS="")
23
24 What would happen on subsequent merges or upgrades if --debug-build
25 was omitted? Would there be a way (/etc/portage file perhaps?) to
26 enable debug builds on a permanent basis?
27
28 >
29 > so what have i missed ?
30 > -mike
31 > --
32 > gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
33 >
34 >
35
36 --
37 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] fix binary debug support, part elevenity billion Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>