On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 12:50 -0500, Ned Ludd wrote: > Good afternoon, > > probably in portage-2.0.54 a patch will be added to emit split debug > info. Having a split debug allows us to retain all the advantages of > stripping executables while gaining the ability to properly debug > executables in bfd aware programs. It's been in testing with a small > hand full of devs and works quite well, but before it's pushed in we > would like to get input from our devs & users. > > Would you be willing to give up space in $ROOT/usr/lib/debug for ELF > executables by default in order to aid in better debugging by or do we > want to only emit it when a FEATURE= is defined. > > Having a split debug pretty much obsoletes the need to add nostrip to > your features in order to get debug info. > > Users wishing to not have debug info can simply add > INSTALL_MASK="/usr/lib/debug ${INSTALL_MASK}" to make.conf or the > environment unless we make it FEATURE based. > > I'm in favor of it enabled per default but I'd like to know what you > think and why. (advantages of on/off by default etc..) > > Anybody wanting to test or make use of this feature right away can grab > a copy of my prepstrip from > http://dev.gentoo.org/~solar/portage_misc/prepstrip and save it to > /usr/lib/portage/bin/prepstrip or patch portage with > http://dev.gentoo.org/~solar/patch_overlay/sys-apps/portage/portage-2.0.53_rc7-prepstrip.patch > It requires you merge pax-utils for the scanelf util. >
I would certainly like this as on by default, and controlled via INSTALL_MASK rather than a FEATURE. (Although I'd have to rebuild my complete system, since I do have it all with debug-symbols enabled ;) //Spider -- begin .signature Tortured users / Laughing in pain See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. end
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part