On 11/7/19 4:13 PM, Nick Clifton wrote:
Hi Egeyar,
Thanks for including me in this discussion.
This option is similar to -frecord-gcc-switches.
For the record I will also note that there is -fverbose-asm which
does almost the same thing, but only records the options as comments
in the assembler. They are never converted into data in the actual
object files.
Heh, we have even more options..
It is also worth noting that if your goal is to record how a binary
was produced, possibly with an eye to reproducibility, then you may
also need to record some environment variables too.
One thing I found with annobin is that capturing preprocessor options
(eg -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE) can be quite hard from inside gcc, since often
they have already been processed and discarded. I do not know if this
affects your actual patch though.
Speaking of annobin, I will bang the gcc plugin gong again here and say
that if your patch is rejected then you might want to consider turning
it into a plugin instead. In that way you will not need approval from
the gcc maintainers. But of course you will have to maintain and
publicise the plugin yourself.
One other thought occurs to me, which is that if the patch is acceptable,
or at least the idea of it, then maybe it would be better to amalgamate
all of the current command line recording options into a single version.
Eg:
--frecord-options=[dwarf,assembler,object]
where:
--frecord-options=dwarf is a synonym for -grecord-switches
--frecord-options=assembler is a synonym for -fverbose-asm
--frecord-options=object is a synonym for your option
I really like the suggested option name unification.
Martin
The user could supply one or more of the selectors to have the recording
happen in multiple places.
Just an idea.
Cheers
Nick
