----- Original Message ----- > On 3/17/14 7:19 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> On 3/3/14 2:49 PM, Omair Majid wrote: > >>> * David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> [2014-02-28 18:48]: > >>>> There are three pieces to all of this: > >>>> > >>>> 1. Generating debug symbols in the binaries (via gcc -g or whatever) > >>>> 2. Generating debuginfo files (zipped or not) (FDS) > >>>> 3. Stripping debug symbols from the binaries (strip-policy) > >>>> > >>>> It may be that we don't have clean separation between them, and if so > >>>> that should be fixed, but I don't see the current proposal as the way > >>>> forward. > >>> Any chance we could clean up the names too? It's not obvious to me why > >>> FDS means 'generating debuginfo files'. > >> FDS stands for Full Debug Symbols and is defined that way in > >> quite a few Makefiles... We just call it FDS for short... > >> > > At least to me, Full Debug Symbols suggests #1 (i.e. that symbols are > > generated > > in the binaries), not #2. That's why it sounded so odd to me when you > > suggested > > turning it off, when we discussed this before. > > > > It's also not clear why you'd want a situation where #3 would be turned > > off, but > > not #2, as you end up with two copies of the debug symbols. That's the > > problem > > I believe we have with our builds; we can turn the stripping off, but then > > we > > end up with duplicate debug information. > > > > Do we need more than just the following three alternatives? > > > > #1. No debugging information at all. > > #2. Debugging information left in the original binaries. > > #3. Debugging information stripped from the binaries and zipped in separate > > files. > > The way Oracle does it is complete debug info in the > separate files and partial debug info left in the original > binaries so you get symbol names in stack traces for those > cases where the full debug info bundles are not available. > > I'm not clear whether we need a 4th alternative or if #3 > covers this case. >
The intent was for #3 to cover this case (i.e. whatever Oracle does now) and for #2 to be what the GNU/Linux distributions want (i.e. binaries with all debuginfo generated and left intact so they can do their own stripping). > Dan > > > > > > It sounds to me like Oracle want #3, while distros want #2 and I imagine > > some > > end users may just want #1 for a faster, smaller build. > > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07
