[gentoo-dev] binary packages and striping

[gentoo-dev] binary packages and striping

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1197 bytes --]

Okay, this is a bit anticipated by my blog post and by what I've been doing 
tonight instead of sleeping :P

Basically I'm trying to get cleaned up what I have in /usr/lib/debug when 
using splitdebug, getting rid of stuff that gets stripped there... mostly 
it's because of errors in packages or in portage, but there is stuff that is 
not depending on either of them, and it's the case of binary packages for 
instance.

skype, blackdown-jdk, rar, opera, openoffice-bin, they are all stripped by 
upstream, but passes through portage's prepstrip, so they get stripped again 
and the missing debug info is tried to be copied in /usr/lib/debug.

One alternative is to add nostrip to the restrict of those packages, so that 
prepallstrip is skipped and extra files are not created.
That is what I've done with emul-x86-* packages and mplayer-bin, but I'm not 
100% sure how it is the idea for the other binary proprietary stuff.

I hope we can agree on something that allows to have a better experience with 
the new features of portage 2.1 :)

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: binary packages and striping

[MIkey]

Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:

> skype, blackdown-jdk, rar, opera, openoffice-bin, they are all stripped by
> upstream, but passes through portage's prepstrip, so they get stripped
> again and the missing debug info is tried to be copied in /usr/lib/debug.
 
Might want to skip stripping gentoo-sources too ;)

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: binary packages and striping

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 08 March 2006 21:59, MIkey wrote:
> Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> > skype, blackdown-jdk, rar, opera, openoffice-bin, they are all stripped
> > by upstream, but passes through portage's prepstrip, so they get stripped
> > again and the missing debug info is tried to be copied in /usr/lib/debug.
>
> Might want to skip stripping gentoo-sources too ;)

there's nothing in gentoo-sources to strip
-mike

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] binary packages and striping

[Mike Frysinger]

On Wednesday 08 March 2006 21:42, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> One alternative is to add nostrip to the restrict of those packages, so
> that prepallstrip is skipped and extra files are not created.
> That is what I've done with emul-x86-* packages and mplayer-bin, but I'm
> not 100% sure how it is the idea for the other binary proprietary stuff.

this is kind of a pita in terms of maintenance and imo a hack ... why not just 
have the splitelf code skip stripped binaries
-mike

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] binary packages and striping

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 428 bytes --]

On Thursday 09 March 2006 04:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> this is kind of a pita in terms of maintenance and imo a hack ... why not
> just have the splitelf code skip stripped binaries
Because of the number of `file` calls needed to identify stripped and 
non-stripped binaries, I'd say...

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] binary packages and striping

[solar]

On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 11:28 +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Thursday 09 March 2006 04:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > this is kind of a pita in terms of maintenance and imo a hack ... why not
> > just have the splitelf code skip stripped binaries
> Because of the number of `file` calls needed to identify stripped and 
> non-stripped binaries, I'd say...

Come to think of it portage-2.1_NEXT will require >=pax-utils-0.1.10
(auto fixing evil rpaths) which has support for '*.a' files now 
(spanky rules).
We can probably obsolete the need to call 'file' all together now in
prepstrip.

Heres a patch also which should help you track down offending programs
as they occur. should catch all cases of 'install -s' also.
http://tinderbox.x86.dev.gentoo.org/portage/local/patches/sys-devel/binutils/binutils-gentoo-strip-safe.patch

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

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] binary packages and striping

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 09 March 2006 05:28, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Thursday 09 March 2006 04:12, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > this is kind of a pita in terms of maintenance and imo a hack ... why not
> > just have the splitelf code skip stripped binaries
>
> Because of the number of `file` calls needed to identify stripped and
> non-stripped binaries, I'd say...

not a valid argument ... look at the code and you'll see we *already* run 
`file` on every ELF
-mike

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: binary packages and striping

[Mike Frysinger]

On Thursday 09 March 2006 09:24, Mikey wrote:
> That is my point.  There is nothing there to strip

file a bug

> yet during an install I 
> noticed it running scanelf on the entire 248 meg source tree.  Kind of a
> pointless task, not to mention extremely wasteful of resources.

yes and no

scanelf will be run on $D regardless, it'll just run less times if you have 
RESTRICT=strip
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list