For some reason gcc might fail to recognize the assert (0) will never
return and emit an implicit-fallthrough warning. Just add a break to
silence it.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wielaard
---
tests/ChangeLog| 4
tests/backtrace-data.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/te
Otherwise strip might run against the system libelf which might be too
old or missing.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wielaard
---
tests/ChangeLog | 4
tests/run-debuginfod-find.sh | 2 +-
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tests/ChangeLog b/tests/ChangeLog
inde
* Mark Wielaard:
> For some reason gcc might fail to recognize the assert (0) will never
> return and emit an implicit-fallthrough warning. Just add a break to
> silence it.
Is this with -DNDEBUG? assert (0) expands to basically nothing in that
case. I'm not sure if we should change that. We c
We really need build-ids for various things. If the system compiler
doesn't generate build-ids warn and generate them anyway for both the
binaries and the tests.
Signed-off-by: Mark Wielaard
---
ChangeLog| 4
configure.ac | 9 +
tests/ChangeLog
Hi -
Presenting testing for the debuginfod .deb/.ddeb support patch, after
finding a good debian-packaging tutorial, and generating a workable
basic set of test deb's on a Ubuntu box.
This patch is also on the elfutils.git fche/debuginfod-deb branch. In
the absence of objections, I plan to merge
On Fri, 2019-12-06 at 17:21 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Mark Wielaard:
>
> > For some reason gcc might fail to recognize the assert (0) will never
> > return and emit an implicit-fallthrough warning. Just add a break to
> > silence it.
>
> Is this with -DNDEBUG? assert (0) expands to basica
Hi Frank,
On Mon, 2019-12-02 at 17:54 -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> If anyone knows of a distro or ISV who is using standard .zip or .tar
> or somesuch archive formats as their distribution mechanism, it would
> be a tiny effort more to add another option, say "-A" (any archive),
> because liba
Hi -
Thanks for the review!
> I looked at some distros, but the only ones that provide consistent
> debug[info] packages do so in rpm or deb format.
Yeah.
> What is the difference between a .deb and a .ddeb file/archive?
AIUI, .ddeb = debugging .deb ... although the "-dbgsym" substring
already
