Re: [PATCH] readelf: Support showing view pairs in loclists as GNU extension.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 09:43:44AM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > View pairs are encoded in .debug_loclists as they are encoded in > .debug_locs sections by the GCC compiler. Scan for DW_AT_GNU_locviews > attributes that point to the view pairs just in front of the actual > location lists. Pushed.
Re: [PATCH] Add a --{enable,disable}-progs configure option
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 08:34:47PM +0200, Fabrice Fontaine via Elfutils-devel
wrote:
> From: Thomas Petazzoni
>
> Add a --{enable,disable}-progs configuration option to elfutils. This
> allows to selectively disable the compilation of the elfutils programs
> (in which case only the libraries are built and installed). This is
> useful because the programs are often not needed, and also because
> building the programs against uClibc causes several issues (lack of
> obstack_printf() in uClibc for example).
I understand why you might want this and it seems to do as described.
But I am slightly reluctant to apply this because it totally breaks
make check. How do you check the build is really correct? Would it be
possible to use a small subset of the testsuite with --disable-progs?
Thanks,
Mark
Re: [PATCH] Add a --{enable,disable}-progs configure option
Hi - > I understand why you might want this and it seems to do as described. > But I am slightly reluctant to apply this because it totally breaks > make check. How do you check the build is really correct? Would it be > possible to use a small subset of the testsuite with --disable-progs? Interesting, is the Makefile.am DEBUGINFO_URLS unset not effective enough? There is little of the build worth checking, given that the config option doesn't change any of the binaries. If we wanted to confirm that it works, a new check/*.sh script could manually source the profile.d file and check that it's okay. Was that what you had in mind? - FChE
Re: [patch] PR25461 default DEBUGINFOD_URLS
Hi Frank,
On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 05:03:52PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler via Elfutils-devel
wrote:
> To give distros a simple knob to let their userbase enjoy debuginfod
> services, we add a --enable-debuginfod-urls[=URLS] to the configury.
> This propagates to $DEBUGINFOD_URLS environment variable settings
> in /etc/profile.d/elfutils.{sh,csh} files.
>
> The default is nothing. If simply enabled, the current prototype
> public server is used. If enabled with parameters, the builder/distro
> can specify a default URL search path of their own.
I like this. Some small nitpicks below.
> diff --git a/config/elfutils.spec.in b/config/elfutils.spec.in
> index 37af1b076095..946e27498b2e 100644
> --- a/config/elfutils.spec.in
> +++ b/config/elfutils.spec.in
> @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@ such servers to download those files on demand.
> %setup -q
>
> %build
> -%configure --program-prefix=%{_programprefix} --enable-debuginfod
> +%configure --program-prefix=%{_programprefix} --enable-debuginfod
> +--enable-debuginfod-urls
> make -s %{?_smp_mflags}
There should be %files entries for the debuginfod-client subpackage.
> +install-data-local:
> + $(INSTALL_DATA) profile.sh -D $(sysconfdir)/profile.d/elfutils.sh
> + $(INSTALL_DATA) profile.csh -D $(sysconfdir)/profile.d/elfutils.csh
It would be more clear to name them debuginfod.{sh,csh} or
debuginfod_urls.{sh,csh}.
Cheers,
Mark
Re: [patch] PR25461 default DEBUGINFOD_URLS
Hi -
> There should be %files entries for the debuginfod-client subpackage.
Yeah, added %config for them too.
> > +install-data-local:
> > + $(INSTALL_DATA) profile.sh -D $(sysconfdir)/profile.d/elfutils.sh
> > + $(INSTALL_DATA) profile.csh -D $(sysconfdir)/profile.d/elfutils.csh
>
> It would be more clear to name them debuginfod.{sh,csh} or
> debuginfod_urls.{sh,csh}.
Sure, can do. I chose elfutils.* in anticipation of having other elfutils
profile.d content in the future, but whatever.
- FChE
Re: [PATCH] Add a --{enable,disable}-progs configure option
Hi Frank, On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 06:25:05PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > I understand why you might want this and it seems to do as described. > > > But I am slightly reluctant to apply this because it totally breaks > > make check. How do you check the build is really correct? Would it be > > possible to use a small subset of the testsuite with --disable-progs? > > Interesting, is the Makefile.am DEBUGINFO_URLS unset not effective > enough? There is little of the build worth checking, given that the > config option doesn't change any of the binaries. If we wanted to > confirm that it works, a new check/*.sh script could manually source > the profile.d file and check that it's okay. Was that what you had in > mind? Nope. Different patch. Cheers, Mark
