Re: [PATCH cygport 1/2] postinst: Never remove an existing .gnu_debuglink

Re: [PATCH cygport 1/2] postinst: Never remove an existing .gnu_debuglink

[Jon Turney]

On 01/02/2022 19:22, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> Hi Jon,
> 
> On Feb  1 17:25, Jon Turney wrote:
>> Be more careful not to remove an existing .gnu_debuglink, even if we
>> think this package has no useful debug symbols.
>>
>> (Some versions of 'llvm-objdump -l' fail to find line number info even
>> though it's there.  Don't break a package which manages it's own debug
>> symbols (e.g. cygwin) when that happens.)
>> ---
>>   lib/src_postinst.cygpart | 28 ++++++++++++++++++----------
>>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/src_postinst.cygpart b/lib/src_postinst.cygpart
>> index d8bb226..e29b2cb 100644
>> --- a/lib/src_postinst.cygpart
>> +++ b/lib/src_postinst.cygpart
>> @@ -1051,23 +1051,31 @@ __prepstrip() {
>>   
>>   			lines=$(${objdump} -d -l "${exe}" 2>/dev/null | sed -ne "s|.*\(/usr/src/debug/${PF}/.*\):[0-9]*$|\1|gp" | sort -u | tee -a ${T}/.dbgsrc.out | wc -l);
> 
> Shouldn't lines be computed *after* the new check for .gnu_deb?  After
> all, it's still pretty time-consuming and if the .gnu_deb check kicks in
> it's never tested...

The objdump invocation has the side effect of creating ${T}/.dbgsrc.out, 
which is later used to determine what source files to put into the 
debuginfo package.