| 1 |
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 15:09 +0200, Ivan Yosifov wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 07:24 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 13:20 -0600, R Hill wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 5 |
> > > > Good afternoon, |
| 6 |
> > > > |
| 7 |
> > > > probably in portage-2.0.54 a patch will be added to emit split debug |
| 8 |
> > > > info. Having a split debug allows us to retain all the advantages of |
| 9 |
> > > > stripping executables while gaining the ability to properly debug |
| 10 |
> > > > executables in bfd aware programs. It's been in testing with a small |
| 11 |
> > > > hand full of devs and works quite well, but before it's pushed in we |
| 12 |
> > > > would like to get input from our devs & users. |
| 13 |
> > > > |
| 14 |
> > > > Would you be willing to give up space in $ROOT/usr/lib/debug for ELF |
| 15 |
> > > > executables by default in order to aid in better debugging by or do we |
| 16 |
> > > > want to only emit it when a FEATURE= is defined. |
| 17 |
> > > |
| 18 |
> > > How much space are we talking about? |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > There is no fixed size here and depends on the number of packages you |
| 21 |
> > have and the CFLAGS passed to the programs you build. |
| 22 |
> > Naturally if you start building all your code with |
| 23 |
> > CFLAGS="-g3 -ggdb" your going to end up with a larger debug info. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Of course I will be compiling with CFLAGS="-g3 -ggdb" :) |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> The reason I don't do it now is because debug info: |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> 1) makes binaries larger |
| 30 |
> 2) makes binaries slower ( in my experience ( may have to do with 1) ) |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> And I don't ( not sure if anyone does ) care about any non-gdb debugger. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> So, can you give us a wild guess about the disk space ? How much does it |
| 35 |
> take on your system and how many packages do you have installed ? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 49268 Nov 19 18:00 /usr/bin/scanelf |
| 38 |
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 5292 Nov 19 |
| 39 |
18:02 /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/scanelf.debug |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
I really can't give an accurate example. Halcyon who has been testing it |
| 43 |
merged world and he was yeilded with 18M of debug info (I have no idea |
| 44 |
how many packages he has). ChrisWhite has also been merging a lot of |
| 45 |
merging with it recently to test KDE stuff which is a pretty big |
| 46 |
package. He may have some useful data that your after. The reason I |
| 47 |
posted the patch and prepstrip here was so that people could formulate |
| 48 |
their own opinions. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
I'm also using an additional patch in my local portage system where I'm |
| 51 |
sub packaging the debug info and it only gets installed when I tell it |
| 52 |
to be installed via the emerge -K option. I use some pretty crafty |
| 53 |
tricks to accomplish this like dynamic ebuild creation. I do this in |
| 54 |
order to have compressed debug info handy vs having it on the live |
| 55 |
filesystem. This probably would not be accepted by portage mainline |
| 56 |
unless I do it in a more elegant way that wont conflict with the future |
| 57 |
portage-3.x series. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> And one more thing. For proper debugging, don't I need the source to be |
| 60 |
> present ? |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
-g3 -ggdb embeds the source code in the debug info so I don't see the |
| 63 |
point. |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
-- |
| 66 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
| 67 |
Gentoo Linux |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
-- |
| 70 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives