[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: On ddebs for udebs

On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 09:30:36AM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
>On 2015-06-02 05:53, Christian PERRIER wrote:
>>Quoting Cyril Brulebois (kibi@debian.org):
>>>Hi Niels,
>>>Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> (2015-06-01):
>>>> There is an existing experimental patch series for debhelper to have it
>>>> automatically create "ddebs"[1][2].  Currently, it /also/ happens for
>>>> udebs, which leads me to:
>>>>  * Is it useful for you to have ddebs generated from udebs?
>>>I don't think so.
>>The same stands for me.
>>Still, I haven't followed discussions about ddebs very closely : my
>>understanding of them is probably the same than Niels' knowledge of
>>udebs..:-). Still, I understand the basic concepts (providing debug
>>symobols and debug "stuff" in dedicated packages in a similar way to
>>what Ubuntu is, IIRC, doing in Launchpad).
>>And with that understanding, I don't really see how it could be
>>possible to use these in the D-I context.
>There was https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=396365 about gdb
>providing a udeb, which has been closed with no action. Now we are dropping
>mklibs (I think?) so at least the libraries wouldn't be minified anymore.
>Without a debugger available the ddebs wouldn't help. If the solution is to
>rebuild the image with an extra gdb file, then I can also rebuild the
>individual udebs with nostrip enabled.

Actually, I think they might be useful just for helping with core
dumps after the fact? We don't tend to have that many binary-arch
udebs, but debugging a crash is difficult in-situ. At least getting a
core file out will help.

Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.                                steve@einval.com
"Because heaters aren't purple!" -- Catherine Pitt

Reply to: