From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id QJ+7ADlHsl8+WgAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 04:32:41 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 00A401F08B; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 04:32:40 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_NONE, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (unknown [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF87F1E58F for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 04:32:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 302943857C75; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 09:32:40 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (wildebeest.demon.nl [212.238.236.112]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 847A23857C75 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 09:32:37 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 847A23857C75 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mark@klomp.org Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (tarox.wildebeest.org [172.31.17.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E8B1302BBED; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:32:36 +0100 (CET) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2D41340007C3; Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:32:36 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <0bc0ff900d654d40ebe24b5e9bf8de4ef1023f39.camel@klomp.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Search for DWZ files in debug-file-directories as well From: Mark Wielaard To: Simon Marchi , Sergio Durigan Junior , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:32:36 +0100 In-Reply-To: <47d6fb03-c296-df0e-6613-0cd08b3c7b0f@simark.ca> References: <20201114234842.2334396-1-sergiodj@sergiodj.net> <47d6fb03-c296-df0e-6613-0cd08b3c7b0f@simark.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-10.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" Hi Simon, On Sun, 2020-11-15 at 20:25 -0500, Simon Marchi wrote: > I don't really have an opinion on this at the moment because I don't > know much about how dwz files are used in practice. Is having a > ".dwz" somewhat standard? Yes, most GNU/Linux distros and some other packaging initiatives, like flatpaks, create dwz alt files, with GDB support since 7.5 and the first distros using it since 2012. dwz https://sourceware.org/dwz/ implements Appendix E DWARF Compression and Duplicate Elimination (since Dw= arf3) and the alt file extension was standardized as Supplemental Dwarf fil= es in Dwarf5 (dwz currently still produces the GNU extension format, which = is close, but not identical to the standardized variant, but work is being = done to fully comply with Dwarf5). Cheers, Mark