On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Cary Coutant <ccout...@google.com> wrote: >>> If I use objcopy --compress-debug-sections to compress the DWARF debug >>> info (but don't use it on the STABS debug info), then the file size >>> ratio is 3.4. >>> >>> While 3.4 is certainly better than 11.5, unless I can come up with a >>> solution where the ratio is less than 2, I'm not currently planning on >>> trying to convince them to switch to DWARF. >> >> The 3.4 number is the number I was interested in. >> Thanks for computing it. > > It's not really fair to compare compressed DWARF with uncompressed stabs, is > it?
Data is data. Plus I doubt anyone is going to go to the trouble of compressing stabs. Not that I think it's a priori worth the effort to dig deeper, but for another datapoint, Redhat added an lza-compressed mini-dwarf-debug section. I'm not sure what it supports (if anything beyond making backtraces better).
