[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: lib/54449: _pic.a libraries contain unwanted debug information
The following reply was made to PR lib/54449; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Christos Zoulas <christos%zoulas.com@localhost>
Andreas Gustafsson <gson%gson.org@localhost>
Subject: Re: lib/54449: _pic.a libraries contain unwanted debug information
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 10:13:02 +0300
> not sure what planet you are talking about, but DBG=-g has been
> the right way to me for a long time, though slightly less than
> i recalled (more a 90s thing :-)
> revision 1.57
> date: 2000-05-01 20:44:36 -0700; author: sjg; state: Exp; lines: +4 -3;
> Allow optimizer/debug flags to be changed on command line without
> breaking everything. Eg. use DBG="-O0 -g" when debugging something.
Yes, you might have been using DBG="-O0 -g" for almost 20 years, but this
variable is not documented anywhere outside the .mk files, and most people
(I am guessing) don't know about it.
> nothing is an accident when "DBG=-g" builds have debug info.
But here we are not building with DBG=-g, but with with MKDEBUG=yes
and libfoo_pic.a ends up with debugging info. Is that on purpose or an
> i used to build my whole systems this way without using MKDEBUG
> (since that's much much newer), initially because i had some
> lossage using separate debug info files, though as i mentioned
> before, i'm considering switching back to get debug symbols back
> in to my static libraries as well. i may have to set execmax
> to some very low value to avoid the other bug..
> i claim that their lack of debug info is a bug in MKDEBUG.
Why would we have both libfoo_g.a and libfoo.a with debugging
symbols? What's the difference between them? As for the other
bugs, are they still there?
Main Index |
Thread Index |