From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4340 invoked by alias); 8 Sep 2004 00:35:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 4328 invoked from network); 8 Sep 2004 00:35:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nevyn.them.org) (66.93.172.17) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 8 Sep 2004 00:35:31 -0000 Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 4.34 #1 (Debian)) id 1C4qQs-0007vV-Gy; Tue, 07 Sep 2004 20:35:30 -0400 Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:35:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: Craig Jeffree Cc: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gdb acceptance of gcc's -feliminate-dwarf2-dups code Message-ID: <20040908003530.GA30427@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: Craig Jeffree , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <1094603624.14297.88.camel@cosmo.preston.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1094603624.14297.88.camel@cosmo.preston.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1+cvs20040105i X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg00061.txt.bz2 On Wed, Sep 08, 2004 at 10:33:44AM +1000, Craig Jeffree wrote: > Hi, > Back in January someone provided a patch to allow gdb to accept code > generated with the gcc option -feliminate-dwarf2-dups. This patch could > not be accepted for various reasons detailed in a thread on gdb-patches > (http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2004-01/msg00386.html). > > At the time others indicated that this feature would be added very > soon, however it appears as though it is still outstanding. Is this > correct? Is anyone working on a patch for this feature? We are stuck > using gcc 2.95.3 because our debug binary is over 900M already, it gets > _much_ bigger if we use gcc 3.x - however this duplicate removal helps > keep the blowout somewhat reasonable. > > Are there others who need this patch? As the list archives will show, the drow_intercu-20040221-branch supports this. I am in the process of submitting it to HEAD, but I have not had time to revise the most recent piece. -- Daniel Jacobowitz