> Note that eu-elfcompress does the same. Not that it really should matter
> which tool does it.
> Currently find-debuginfo.sh uses tools from both binutils and elfutils, it
> might be nice to only
> depend on one set of tools (my preference would obviously be to migrate
> everything to the
> elfutils toolset).
I have no preference at this point. AFAIU both tools use the same zlib library
to do the compression, so there's no benefit from choosing on or the other.
> There is also zlib-gnu, the older, pre-standard, compression. Dunno if we
> want to support that
> too.
I don't see that as useful now, but it's easy to add later if someone want this.
> I do think that this is a nice option to have in theory. But I haven't tried
> it myself yet
OK, good to hear.
>> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/795.patch
>> https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/795.diff
>> - id="`readelf -Wn
>> "${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/usr/lib/debug/.dwz/${dwz_multifile_name}" \ - 2>/dev/null
>> | sed -n 's/^ Build ID: \([0-9a-f]\+\)/\1/p'`"
> I am slightly surprised we don't seem to use the dwz build-id. Could you
> double check
> we don't actually need that id?
AFAIU, yes, we don't need it. I've split this part off into a separate pull
request: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/825.
> Also, is there really no distro that is contemplating to use this?
>If not, then maybe it is better to not add the extra complexity till someone
>really wants it
Well, my intention is to propose this as patch for the rpm package in openSUSE
Tumbleweed, either as upstream backport, or as local patch. Obviously I'd
prefer a backport ;) .
--
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/795#issuecomment-524822852_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
