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

Re: Mandatory -dbg packages

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 10:48:24AM +0000, Philip Ashmore wrote:
> >>On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Philip Ashmore wrote:
> >>>While this feature allows gdb to know the correct source locations, using it
> >>>implies that packages requiring the feature contain incorrect source paths -
> >>>wouldn't it be better for these packages to contain correct source paths in
> >>>the first place?
> In Fedora, the dbg package includes the source code for the package,
> and the debug information points to it.

In Debian, they do not, and that's a feature; first, there are many
valid use cases of using debug packages that do not require the source
code. Second, having the source in the debug package implies duplication
of said source, which is a waste of space.

> In Fedora, by convention, such source code goes under /usr/src.

Actually, on RPM-based systems, installing a source package implies the
source goes in to /usr/src somewhere; even if you built an RPM source
package with source living in $HOME, installing it will still make the
source go into /usr/src. In that light, it makes sense that they have
their debug packages point towards that directory.

In Debian, installing a source package is just not possible technically;
you can only unpack them. When you do that, by default they get unpacked
in your current working directory. In other words, the location of the
actual source in a source package on a Debian system is utterly
unpredictable, and so there is no such concept as a "correct source
location" on Debian-based systems.

> If you prefer your users mess with .gdbinit so they can create a
> useful stack trace then that's up to you.

There is no need for source to be able to produce a useful stack trace;
the file and function names are part of the debugging symbols. In other
words, once you install the debugging symbols -- regardless of where
they think the source lives -- you will be able to produce a useful
stack trace.

The only reason why you'd want to connect the source to the debugging
symbold is because you need to connect the original source lines to the
object code that you're inspecting -- e.g., because you're
single-stepping through a library. While doing that can be useful in
some corner cases, it's not something I expect a random user would ever
need to do.

Copyshops should do vouchers. So that next time some bureaucracy requires you
to mail a form in triplicate, you can mail it just once, add a voucher, and
save on postage.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: