On Fri, 2021-04-30 at 19:57 +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, 2021-04-10 at 18:44 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > > [I'm forwarding the mail from Luca who is not subscribed to fedora- > > devel] > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 01:38:31PM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote: > > Cross-posting to the mailing lists of a few relevant projects. > > Note that in this version of the email the [N] references in your email > don't seem to point anywhere. I found an older variant of the same > email which contained: > > [0] https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/18433 > [1] https://systemd.io/COREDUMP_PACKAGE_METADATA/ > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Package_information_on_ELF_objects > [3] https://github.com/systemd/package-notes Sorry about that! Must have messed up the copy&paste. > > After an initial discussion [0], recently we have been working on a new > > specification [0] to encode rich package-level metadata inside ELF > > objects, so that it can be included automatically in generated coredump > > files. The prototype to parse this in systemd-coredump and store the > > information in systemd-journal is ready for testing and merged > > upstream. We are now seeking further comments/opinions/suggestions, as > > we have a few months before the next release and thus there's plenty of > > time to make incompatible changes to the format and implementation, if > > required. > > > > A proposal to use this by default for all packages built in Fedora 35 > > has been submitted [1]. > > > > The Fedora Wiki and the systemd.io document have more details, but to > > make a long story short, a new .notes.package section with a JSON > > payload will be included in ELF objects, encoding various package- > > build-time information like distro name&version, package > > name&version, > > etc. > > Is there a list of default keys (and their canonical spelling, upper- > lower-Camel_Case, etc.)? If there is, could we have a "debuginfod" key > with as value an URL pointing to the debuginfod server URL where the > embedded build-id executable, debuginfo and sources can be found? > https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html The "Implementation" section of the spec lists the "main" fields: https://systemd.io/COREDUMP_PACKAGE_METADATA/ (source for that is https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/main/docs/COREDUMP_PACKAGE_METADATA.md ) Would you like to send a PR to update it and add that field? > > To summarize from the discussion, the main reasons why we believe this > > is useful are as following: > > > > 1) minimal containers: the rpm database is not installed in the > > containers. The information about build-ids needs to be stored > > externally, so package name information is not available immediately, > > but only after offline processing. The new note doesn't depend on the > > rpm db in any way. > > > > 2) handling of a core from a container, where the container and host > > have different distros > > > > 3) self-built and external packages: unless a lot of care is taken to > > keep access to the debuginfo packages, this information may be lost. > > The new note is available even if the repository metadata gets lost. > > Users can easily provide equivalent information in a format that makes > > sense in their own environment. It should work even when rpms and debs > > and other formats are mixed, e.g. during container image creation. > > > > Other than in Fedora, we are already making the required code changes > > at Microsoft to use the same format&specification for internally-built > > binaries, and for tools that parse core files and logs. > > > > Tools for RPM and DEB (debhelper) integration are also available [3]. > > > > > -- > > > Kind regards, > > > Luca Boccassi -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part