> "Mark" == Mark Wielaard writes:
Mark> To be honest I would like gdb to drop this section. It eats up valuable
Mark> space that I think we could use better and/or in other ways that make it
Mark> easier to add other consumers for it. But only by actually supporting it
Mark> now and working t
> "Ulrich" == Ulrich Drepper writes:
Ulrich> Why would you assume this is even possible. The format is exclusively
Ulrich> used by gdb. The gdb people unilaterally make changes. If gdb cannot
Ulrich> read the info in a file it'll ignore it. Versioning all the changes
Ulrich> etc is likely
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 14:15, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> OK, let's say arguendo .gdb_index undergoes a few versions over the
> course of a year. (One may assume that it's self-identifying.)
> Why not pretty-print them all?
Why would you assume this is even possible. The format is exclusively
us
On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 11:12 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> Obviously it's not a catastrophic issue.
Yeah :) Sorry this is taking so much electrons. Clearly the time to
write these emails has taken more energy than writing the actual code.
But better to talk it out than to just let it stand there w
Obviously it's not a catastrophic issue. But these are tools for ELF and
DWARF, not for one-off formats produced and used only by a single tool.
Even sdt has two whole disjoint consumers.
___
elfutils-devel mailing list
elfutils-devel@lists.fedorahosted.
Hi, Roland -
roland wrote:
> > I'm curious why you think that is a showstopper distinction. What
> > harm would come from teaching eu-readelf how to pretty-print some
> > "non-interchange" formats, if they are reasonably stable, don't
> > require much eu-readelf uglification?
>
> There is no re
> I'm curious why you think that is a showstopper distinction. What
> harm would come from teaching eu-readelf how to pretty-print some
> "non-interchange" formats, if they are reasonably stable, don't
> require much eu-readelf uglification?
There is no reason to think that .gdb_index format is r
Hi, Roland -
> > I thought the objection was that it wasn't properly
> > specified/standardized yet. Which it now is IMHO.
>
> It's not an interchange format, it's a gdb format.
I'm curious why you think that is a showstopper distinction. What
harm would come from teaching eu-readelf how to pre
On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 10:17 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > I guess I could just use binutils readelf then. Pity, since I like the
> > eu-readelf output better to be honest.
>
> You can just write your tool using libelf and with the output format you
> like. It's just not part of eu-readelf.
It
> I thought the objection was that it wasn't properly
> specified/standardized yet. Which it now is IMHO.
It's not an interchange format, it's a gdb format.
> I guess I could just use binutils readelf then. Pity, since I like the
> eu-readelf output better to be honest.
You can just write your t
On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 09:16 -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > http://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb/Index-Section-Format.html
> > I hope that resolves Roland's doubts about the usefulness of
> > parsing/outputting this section with eu-readelf.
>
> It really doesn't have anything to do wi
> http://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb/Index-Section-Format.html
> I hope that resolves Roland's doubts about the usefulness of
> parsing/outputting this section with eu-readelf.
It really doesn't have anything to do with the objection at all.
> It was already useful BTW. We found out
On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 17:11 +0200, Petr Machata wrote:
> Mark Wielaard writes:
> > For CUs with no associated code and a new enough gcc this will no longer
> > complain when no aranges section is found when the CU doesn't have
> > low_pc set.
>
> I'm not sure. I think that having empty arange se
Mark Wielaard writes:
> On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 11:44 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> > "Mark" == Mark Wielaard writes:
>>
>> Mark> Note that libdw relies on .debug_aranges. For example dwarf_addrdie (),
>> Mark> which returns the CU DIE containing a given address, just returns NULL
>> Mark> if t
Hi there,
a rather large patch has landed on dwarf branch. This is a summary for
those interested in writing dwarflint checks that are not me (hi Mark!)
The goal was to clean up the way we create location descriptors for
reporting (the "wheres"). Until now we used single "struct where" with
a b
On Mon, 2011-04-18 at 11:44 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> > "Mark" == Mark Wielaard writes:
>
> Mark> Note that libdw relies on .debug_aranges. For example dwarf_addrdie (),
> Mark> which returns the CU DIE containing a given address, just returns NULL
> Mark> if the aranges section isn't there.
On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 12:01 -0600, Tom Tromey wrote:
> Mark> IMHO the current documentation is fine, it should just be moved
> Mark> to a more easily discoverable location.
>
> Tom> Ok. I will give it a shot.
>
> It is in gdb.texinfo now.
Thanks.
http://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb
17 matches
Mail list logo
