From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf@redhat.com>
To: gdb@sources.redhat.com, binutils@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: stabs vs. dwarf-2 for C programs
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 19:17:00 -0000
Message-id: <20010412221742.A22383@redhat.com>
References: <5mwv8pzgvt.fsf@jtc.redback.com>
X-SW-Source: 2001-04/msg00091.html

On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 07:13:26PM -0700, J.T. Conklin wrote:
>In general, are there any advantages for using dwarf-2 over 
>stabs debugging symbols for C (not C++) programs?
>
>I did a quick test of rebuilding our system with dwarf-2 debug
>symbols, and found that the image file grew from 35MB to 167MB 
>and link times nearly quadrupled, so dwarf-2 isn't looking so 
>good so far.  If I had to guess, it looks like duplicate debug
>info (from headers, etc.) isn't being eliminated as is done 
>for stabs.

Daniel Berlin contributed some duplicate debug elimination code to gcc
for Dwarf-2.  It should be in the gcc 3.0 branch, if you are
adventurous.

There is an option to turn it on "-feliminate-dwarf2-dups".  I don't
know if this is the default or not.

cgf