On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 18 Feb 2015 13:54, H.J. Lu wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: >> > On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: >> >> > That doesn't seem like a smart default. And why is is Linux/x86 only? >> >> > Shouldn't that be something that is done explicitly by a distro >> >> > configuring binutils after making sure it actually is beneficial >> >> > (debuginfo is often compressed in a different way, on the package/file >> >> > level or with dwz). And after making sure all tools actually work with >> >> > it? There are various tools that don't handle the .zdebug format like >> >> > valgrind. And at least elfutils has trouble with it for ET_REL files, >> >> > like kernel modules, because relocations don't actually apply anymore to >> >> > the section data as is (but only after the decompression). >> >> >> >> Now it becomes a monthly topic: >> >> >> >> https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2015-01/msg00089.html >> > >> > Thanks, I hadn't seen that before. Alan Modra makes some good points in >> > that thread why it is not a good change: >> > https://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2015-01/msg00135.html >> > Do people agree with that? And/Or can the change be reverted for now >> > till there is agreement it is a desirable default? >> >> It may not be a good idea for all targets. If you find an issue >> on Linux/x86, please file a bug binutils report. > > i think we already have the reports: multiple people don't think it should be > (1) x86-specific or (2) required. don't get me wrong -- i think having > support > like this is great. that doesn't mean we should be forcing it. > -mike
Please file a bug report with a testcase. -- H.J.
