From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9969 invoked by alias); 5 Jun 2003 18:48:22 -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 9951 invoked from network); 5 Jun 2003 18:48:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO crack.them.org) (146.82.138.56) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 5 Jun 2003 18:48:21 -0000 Received: from dsl093-172-017.pit1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([66.93.172.17] helo=nevyn.them.org ident=mail) by crack.them.org with asmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 19NznJ-0005SG-00; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 13:49:01 -0500 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 19Nzmb-0004AN-00; Thu, 05 Jun 2003 14:48:17 -0400 Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2003 18:48:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Michael Snyder Cc: Nick Clifton , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: RFC: strip --strip-nondebug Message-ID: <20030605184817.GB15959@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Snyder , Nick Clifton , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com References: <3EDF8C1C.5D5067DE@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EDF8C1C.5D5067DE@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i X-SW-Source: 2003-06/txt/msg00211.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jun 05, 2003 at 11:29:48AM -0700, Michael Snyder wrote: > Nick Clifton wrote: > > > > Hi Guys, > > > > I am seeking comments and criticisms on the attached patch. It adds > > a new switch to strip: > > > > --strip-nondebug > > > > This can be used to create an output file which only contains the > > debug information from an executable. This would allow stripped > > binaries to be shipped with separate debug info files, and provided > > that the debugger supported it, they could still be debugged. > > > > The patch is incomplete - it needs a ChangeLog entry as well as > > modifications to NEWS and binutils.texi to document the new > > functionality, but I will write all of these once/if the patch is > > in acceptable state. > > How big a reduction in size would you expect, typically? > I'm a little ignorant, but what strippable info is in there > that gdb doesn't need? The trick is that the output file doesn't contain the code or data segments. Just the debug info. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer