Re: [patch] build-id .debug files load (like .gnu_debuglink)

Eli Zaretskii
2007-09-01T14:22:56Z

> Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 15:25:14 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl>
> CC: eliz@gnu.org, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, roland@redhat.com
>
> I think we should stick with references to official GNU releases in
> our documentation.

I'd support that if most installations had official versions. But
that doesn't seem to be the case in the recent years: almost every
GNU/Linux box I get my hands on have "2.aa.bb YYYYMMDD" version on it.
Here's a typical example (from none other than a gnu.org machine,
btw):

eliz@fencepost:~$ ld --version
GNU ld version 2.16.91 20060118 Debian GNU/Linux

Given that this seems to be the rule rather than exception, I see no
sense in insisting that unofficial versions do not exist, or aren't
used widely enough to be mentioned in the docs.