From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16484 invoked by alias); 3 Jan 2013 16:56:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 16410 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jan 2013 16:56:02 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,TW_BJ,TW_DW,TW_JC,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:56:00 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r03GtppU008934 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 3 Jan 2013 11:55:51 -0500 Received: from [10.36.4.29] (vpn1-4-29.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.4.29]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r03GtatX002991 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 3 Jan 2013 11:55:45 -0500 Message-ID: <50E5B73C.8090009@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 16:56:00 -0000 From: nick clifton User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Taylor CC: binutils@sourceware.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, gdb@sourceware.org Subject: Re: stabs support in binutils, gcc, and gdb References: <12972.1357230104@usendtaylorx2l> In-Reply-To: <12972.1357230104@usendtaylorx2l> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2013-01/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 Hi David, > What is the status of STABS support? Essentially it is in maintenance mode. But this is due to lack of developers interested in extending STABS support, rather than a policy of maintenance-only. > Are there any plans to deprecate STABS support? No, none. > If STABS enhancements were made and > posted would they be frowned upon? Or would they be reviewed for > possible inclusion in a future release? No, they would be reviewed and, assuming that they are suitable, they would be accepted for inclusion in future releases. > Switching to DWARF causes our build products directory (which contains > *NONE* of the intermediate files) to swell from 1.2 GB to 11.5 GB. > Ouch! The DWARF ELF files are 8-12 times the size of the STABS ELF > files. > > If the DWARF files were, say, a factor of 2 the size of the STABS files, > I could probably sell people on switching to DWARF; but, a factor of 8 > to 12 is too much. Have you tried using a DWARF compression tool like dwz ? http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-04/msg00686.html Or maybe the --compress-debug-sections option to objcopy ? Cheers Nick