From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=X5RI=AM=redhat.com=fweimer@sourceware.org>
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D5053858C83
	for <libc-help@sourceware.org>; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 16:14:21 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 8D5053858C83
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
	s=mimecast20190719; t=1682093661;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=z0tkFZljGxX3ylA5MzRdyJ6FiKYdH/cgH7bD7VAH8Vs=;
	b=V3a8MbPP48KlzL1j4TdS74rQB5rCEYZHa0q79Ct8IJw5ntJJaaLH1ima7Ut4DC87PgGUsB
	f0dqMQ+qaJzSW+G5EO87N9qkzACoqGZO10Od43q/y/9ZDzUBdLOhMBwNp2pOu6aBo6FtQX
	hD4uakIyr8Acnn1ubUyth/eEmu6U3EE=
Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com
 [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS
 (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id
 us-mta-323-KRwRRvD7PzmH8ak_oDlfZw-1; Fri, 21 Apr 2023 12:14:19 -0400
X-MC-Unique: KRwRRvD7PzmH8ak_oDlfZw-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F8E0185A78B;
	Fri, 21 Apr 2023 16:14:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.9])
	by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9580492C3E;
	Fri, 21 Apr 2023 16:14:18 +0000 (UTC)
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Tomasz Dziendzielski via Libc-help <libc-help@sourceware.org>
Cc: Tomasz Dziendzielski <tomasz.dziendzielski@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Missing CFLAGS for some objects
References: <CAJkqNs1UBtMenz8=9bEMpy0ZoK-GuBy15w=vpSu9dNMiHLSmZw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2023 18:14:17 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAJkqNs1UBtMenz8=9bEMpy0ZoK-GuBy15w=vpSu9dNMiHLSmZw@mail.gmail.com>
	(Tomasz Dziendzielski via Libc-help's message of "Fri, 21 Apr 2023
	13:45:51 +0200")
Message-ID: <87r0sdmcva.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.10
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <libc-help.sourceware.org>

* Tomasz Dziendzielski via Libc-help:

> Hello,
> one of our developers reported that when we build libc in our environment
> using Yocto Project we end up with corrupted debug symbols even though the
> -g flag is passed to the CFLAGS variable. I noticed that in fact some gcc
> commands (about ~300) are missing -g flag in the invocation. So now my
> question is: is there some reason why some objects are built without CFLAGS?
> You can get the list of objects without debug symbols (and CFLAGS) by
> setting CFLAGS=" -g " for make and using grep for gcc or cross gcc in the
> make execution log file and grep with an invert match for ' -g '.

Those are all linker invocations as far as I can see?  The -g flag will
be dropped by the compiler anyway.

Thanks,
Florian