From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2086 invoked by alias); 10 Dec 2002 17:03:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 2075 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2002 17:03:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Dec 2002 17:03:43 -0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBAGc9P20604 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 11:38:09 -0500 Received: from pobox.corp.redhat.com (pobox.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.156]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBAH3gD28041; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:03:42 -0500 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (romulus-int.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.46]) by pobox.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBAH3fq08024; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:03:41 -0500 Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id C494BFF79; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 10:59:04 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15862.3912.243064.423628@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 09:14:00 -0000 To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Jim Blandy , Elena Zannoni , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: support debug info in separate files In-Reply-To: <3DF6107D.7080708@redhat.com> References: <15861.29951.564644.347349@localhost.redhat.com> <3DF6107D.7080708@redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg00326.txt.bz2 Andrew Cagney writes: > Hmm, to wear fernando's hat :-) Is there a new test that demonstrates > this feature? You need the special strip program. One could think of avoiding running strip by storing the blah.debug files in the gdb.base source directory, but then the executable built at the time you run the tests wouldn't be stripped as gdb expects it. One other way would be to maybe store the strip program somewhere in the gdb source, but I don't think this elfutils/strip is FSF. I know that Jim was able to run the testsuite but I think he relied on having the proper strip installed on the system. Elena > > > Some random comments... > > > > This works only for Elf. Will this interfere when other file formats > > are processed? (I haven't tried with a, say, coff file, which is > > impossible of course because this is elfutils based). > > > > > * utils.c (calc_crc32): New function. > > > * defs.h (calc_crc32): New declaration. > > > > Now we have 4 identical crc32's functions in gdb. Any chance to > > delete a few? > > > > For the debug file name suggest looking at HAVE_DOS_BASED_FILE_SYSTEM > > in libiberty, and its uses in gdb/source.c. > > > > [...] > > > > > + strcat (debugfile, ".debug/"); > > [...] > > > > > + strcat (debugfile, "/"); > > > > [...] > > > + strcat (debugfile, "/"); > > > > Should these be DIR_SEPARATOR instead? I guess DJGPP doesn't care though. > > > > In this message, > > http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb/2002-09/msg00312.html I pointed out a > > few things that could be done to improve this patch. For instance, > > instead of adding a completely new objfile that would be only for the > > debug info, add the debug info to the existing objfiles. I haven't > > had a chance to see if you changed the patch to do something different > > or not. It also seemed at that stage that we were gaining an extra > > copy of the minimal symbols, and this can bloat gdb even more. Was > > this changed? > > > > Other comments I pointed out in that message have been addressed by > > Alex already. > > > > Elena > > > > > > >