Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Split ELF Debug (default or not?)

[Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>]

On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 23:01 +0200, Ivan Yosifov wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 11:55 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 10:44 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 15:22 +0000, Edward Catmur wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 08:40 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 15:09 +0200, Ivan Yosifov wrote:
> > > > > > And one more thing. For proper debugging, don't I need the source to be
> > > > > > present ?
> > > > > 
> > > > > -g3 -ggdb embeds the source code in the debug info so I don't see the 
> > > > > point.
> > > > 
> > > > It doesn't; at least not with gcc 3.4.4. It does embed function
> > > > prototypes and macro definitions, though.
> > > > 
> > > > Ed Catmur
> > > 
> > > Eh? 
> > 
> > 
> > Never mind you were right Ed. taviso pointed out that dwarf2 doesnt 
> > support embedding the actual source. I was seeing the source due to me 
> > not having deleted the source.
> > 
> > Guess that is where the debugedit thing of Tester's would come in handy 
> > on glibc hosts.
> 
> What is this debugedit thing for us non-devs ? IMO portage should have
> some way to keep the sources around for debugging, for the patch you are
> proposing to be fully useful.

Having the source around or not does not make the splitdebug feature any
less useful. debugedit would however enhance some aspects of debugging.
See the comments posted at the top of this thread from tester@gentoo on 
debugedit.

-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list