Re: Debian: quassel build fails with DWZ errors when using LLVM-19 and DWARF-5
- To: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>, Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>, Fangrui Song <i@maskray.me>, doko@debian.org, niels@thykier.net, Christian Göttsche <cgzones@googlemail.com>, scott@kitterman.com, pkg-kde-extras@lists.alioth.debian.org, debian-qt-kde@lists.debian.org, Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@gmail.com>, Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@debian.org>
- Subject: Re: Debian: quassel build fails with DWZ errors when using LLVM-19 and DWARF-5
- From: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 15:39:29 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] CA+icZUXT0Aw0Uj7b0ogEgJognF3F7CdkfrMho5CPBxEq--VtGQ@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: sedat.dilek@gmail.com
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] CA+icZUXwC3-GM-jvz0LC13r7tEHWbxSD8AJrz7-8uaaOk54j3Q@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <[🔎] CA+icZUUjE_tJax51ohC+cfcj8iLd_2X8beXWMmkeZgq54AqgZQ@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] CA+icZUXwC3-GM-jvz0LC13r7tEHWbxSD8AJrz7-8uaaOk54j3Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 11:34 AM Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> OK.
>
> Using dh_strip instead of dh_strip_nondeterminism (default) ...
>
Hi,
In my latest build I created an OVERRIDE in debian/rules for dh_dwz as
this seems to have problems with DWARF-v5.
dh_strip_nondeterminism ... passed
dh_dwz ... SKIPPED
dh_strip ... passed
^^ Build OK
At 99% when linking the quassel binaries I see /usr/bin/ld -
GNU/binutils LD linker - is used (via ps -ef).
This uses DWARF Level 4 as default (gas/as.c file in the sources).
This is binutils 2.43.1 in Debian/unstable.
Looks like I have to force the usage of LLD linker somehow.
Link: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1867745/cmake-use-a-custom-linker
In Linux-kernel we pass -Wa.-dwarf-5 to the assembler.
Clang (Clang++ ?) uses an Integrated ASsember (IAS).
Maybe, I need to pass -gwarf-5 plus -Wa.-dwarf-5 to CC and CXX lines?
If someone has an idea, please let me know.
Might be dh_dwz (dwz) is simply BROKEN with DWARF-v5.
Best thanks.
Best regards,
-Sedat-
Reply to: