Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 20:17:02 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: add -debuginfo packages
Message-ID: <20090821001702.GA15308@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
References: <6910a60908041158p10fa632cvc2f21524e33b74ce@mail.gmail.com>  <4A8DDEE8.2050606@users.sourceforge.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A8DDEE8.2050606@users.sourceforge.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 06:40:24PM -0500, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
>Sorry for not getting back to this earlier.
>
>On 04/08/2009 13:58, Reini Urban wrote:
>> Rather than stripping our exe's and dll's I suggest to strip the debug
>> info into
>> seperate /usr/lib/debug/path/file.dbg and package them seperately in -debuginfo
>> packages such as with fedora.
>>
>> On any error which requires user-side debugging these symbols can be used
>> by gdb (--symbols=SYMFILE) easily.
>>
>> dumper should use them too.
>> Is this a good idea?
>
>At least in theory, certainly.  As for implementation:

I don't see why dumper would need this.  AFAIK, the linux kernel doesn't
need debugging information to dump core.

>This would require changes in cygport, upset, and setup.exe but would 
>save maintainers from having to change each one of their packages.
>
>Thoughts?

This seems like a not-inconsiderable amount of work for something that
would only rarely be used.  How many people here are capable of firing
up a debugger to decode problems?

cgf

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple