Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ivan Yosifov <ivan@×××××××.net>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Split ELF Debug (default or not?)
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 21:04:51
Message-Id: 1133125287.7388.4.camel@home.yosifov.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Split ELF Debug (default or not?) by Ned Ludd
1 On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 11:55 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
2 > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 10:44 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
3 > > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 15:22 +0000, Edward Catmur wrote:
4 > > > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 08:40 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
5 > > > > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 15:09 +0200, Ivan Yosifov wrote:
6 > > > > > And one more thing. For proper debugging, don't I need the source to be
7 > > > > > present ?
8 > > > >
9 > > > > -g3 -ggdb embeds the source code in the debug info so I don't see the
10 > > > > point.
11 > > >
12 > > > It doesn't; at least not with gcc 3.4.4. It does embed function
13 > > > prototypes and macro definitions, though.
14 > > >
15 > > > Ed Catmur
16 > >
17 > > Eh?
18 >
19 >
20 > Never mind you were right Ed. taviso pointed out that dwarf2 doesnt
21 > support embedding the actual source. I was seeing the source due to me
22 > not having deleted the source.
23 >
24 > Guess that is where the debugedit thing of Tester's would come in handy
25 > on glibc hosts.
26
27 What is this debugedit thing for us non-devs ? IMO portage should have
28 some way to keep the sources around for debugging, for the patch you are
29 proposing to be fully useful.
30
31 --
32 Cheers,
33 Ivan Yosifov.
34
35 --
36 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies