From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19108 invoked by alias); 14 Jan 2013 16:12:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 19092 invoked by uid 22791); 14 Jan 2013 16:12:31 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,TW_BJ,TW_JC X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-oa0-f41.google.com (HELO mail-oa0-f41.google.com) (209.85.219.41) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:12:26 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id k14so4194780oag.0 for ; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:12:25 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=3H2yjAtvxchqL3p4HJUsRzW91fZH248wNM8qO3rupdk=; b=Vs5CSBnBt7SCDfCRzffv4SyyHm+AZMibfpS5eSa52un3xKkUTjwpvVcof9gNNXTKOo weOVNxVsXOxoVUK6FaWgdYJfXBQWhtCaSxsHi7B/gqC4x4I+newGebcESqtshVKXBoN4 vA6af6FnpcRCzOxFv/LhRg4gDiKPKePRdC4fNOEeskezPH6O71T7HNnUmpdSM3fs9sb8 PFyW3pmveE1wlySIO4ouzybYqyOmvgQE5TS501geqXdmfoDQkaB+JeXQMi3H/X08n2kj 2m4FgT/G7mkoo6RDJT/phCg8bj3HldJUoNRjMWyPJrZWofdPi3JWr/mpDHmY54RZO2N1 DuHQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.31.227 with SMTP id d3mr51563743oei.70.1358179945730; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:12:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.76.103.168 with HTTP; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 08:12:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <12972.1357230104@usendtaylorx2l> <50E5B73C.8090009@redhat.com> <13440.1357915978@usendtaylorx2l> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 16:12:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: stabs support in binutils, gcc, and gdb From: Doug Evans To: Cary Coutant Cc: David Taylor , nick clifton , Binutils , gcc , gdb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmvYXge44e/wJZWOv6PU6UfU0u//g19KsvkDNu/AwaqKUfxOq25vap14rI+T+D9EYuyfaxGi6kxagH14Xn9UWQkuCBpoJUwbKI7QaQR5W6S6S5j8IovYP8xemTNxtbGax9kwTTmd/XxexqOvDhRYN/hNONsXMp8socBWAie/SFB1YinI0OaISNZ4MpVjrrZJBuWHdcs 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/msg00052.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Cary Coutant wrote: >>> If I use objcopy --compress-debug-sections to compress the DWARF debug >>> info (but don't use it on the STABS debug info), then the file size >>> ratio is 3.4. >>> >>> While 3.4 is certainly better than 11.5, unless I can come up with a >>> solution where the ratio is less than 2, I'm not currently planning on >>> trying to convince them to switch to DWARF. >> >> The 3.4 number is the number I was interested in. >> Thanks for computing it. > > It's not really fair to compare compressed DWARF with uncompressed stabs, is it? Data is data. Plus I doubt anyone is going to go to the trouble of compressing stabs. Not that I think it's a priori worth the effort to dig deeper, but for another datapoint, Redhat added an lza-compressed mini-dwarf-debug section. I'm not sure what it supports (if anything beyond making backtraces better).