From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24122 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2015 22:03:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 2534 invoked by uid 89); 18 Feb 2015 21:57:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=2.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_FROM_URIBL_PCCC,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-Spam-User: qpsmtpd, 2 recipients X-HELO: mail-ob0-f175.google.com Received: from mail-ob0-f175.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f175.google.com) (209.85.214.175) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:55:00 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f175.google.com with SMTP id va2so7591288obc.6; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:54:17 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.132.82 with SMTP id os18mr1028985oeb.0.1424296457136; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:54:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.76.134.102 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:54:17 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1424295643.23458.30.camel@bordewijk.wildebeest.org> References: <20150107144548.GX5432@adacore.com> <20150218120841.GD23529@adacore.com> <20150218165457.GU544@vapier> <20150218194443.GW544@vapier> <1424291541.23458.28.camel@bordewijk.wildebeest.org> <1424295643.23458.30.camel@bordewijk.wildebeest.org> Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 22:03:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ping #3: [RFA] Add --with-libz-prefix option in config/zlib.m4 From: "H.J. Lu" To: Mark Wielaard Cc: Joel Brobecker , GCC Patches , Binutils , GDB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-02/txt/msg00501.txt.bz2 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. Thanks. -- H.J.