On 8/27/20 5:31 PM, Chris Johns wrote: > On 28/8/20 5:39 am, Michael Davidsaver wrote: >> Is there a way to ask RSB to either build the toolchain >> (ie. gcc itself) without debug symbols, or to strip them >> prior to install? > > Not at the moment but this would be a nice feature. I can see it being needed. > >> >> https://github.com/mdavidsaver/rsb/releases/ >> >> I keep a set of pre-built RTEMS pc*86 toolchains for use >> by CI builders, principally travis-ci.org. In looking >> at adding RTEMS 5.1 to this I noticed that the resulting >> compressed tar was considerably larger that previously. >> 4.9 or 4.10 for pc386 are ~100MB, while 5.1 for pc686 >> is weighing in at 380MB. >> >> Looking into it, most of this size seems to be in debug >> symbols. eg. "libexec/gcc/i386-rtems5/7.5.0/cc1plus" >> is (uncompressed) 166MB with debug symbols and 26MB without. > > That is a saving. The RSB could scan the tree of files before coping them to > the > install point and for any host executable run the host's `strip` command. I > suppose we could also run it on any host archives if there is any easy way to > detect them.
strip -d <prefix>/libexec/gcc/*/*/cc1* strip -d <prefix>/bin/* Gives ~50% reduction in compressed and uncompressed sizes without much effort. > A tool chain also installs the various libc, libm, libstd++ etc libraries for > the RTEMS architecture. With an expanding number multilibs in some > architectures > the number and so the overall size of those libraries is growing. I am not > sure > if we can do something about that. Stripping them would help but this leaves > you > with RTEMS executables that have no debugging info. Would that be an issue? I'd prefer to keep debug symbols for target code. >> Also, I installed the following packages to a clean >> ubuntu 18.04.5 image in order to build. This release >> doesn't install /usr/bin/python by default (just 'python3'). >> The GDB build seems to handle this just fine, but the >> rtems-tools build errors when it can't run 'python'. > > This is a complex issue with no simple solution for users that we can see. I > have raised a ticket for this against the 5.2 milestone: > > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4064 > > We have been discussing this topic in: > > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4037 > > The `waf` part of the discussion is relevant here. The RSB can be considered a > "user" and so it needs to manage the lack of a `python` command. > >> bison >> flex >> texinfo >> unzip >> git >> python3-dev >> python-dev > > I do not think adding a check to `sb-check` is the answer, I think having the > RSB invoke `waf` as `python3 waf ...` is the best solution but I need to teach > it to do this. > > As a work around if you create a virtual environment to build the tools in > using ... > > python3 -m venv rtems-rsb > . ./rtems-rsb/bin/activate > > ... you should have a `python` command in your path. I consider this a work > around to an RSB fix but it is something you can do now. > > I have added this documentation about this to the user manual on `master`, > maybe > it should be ported onto the 5 branch? > > Chris > _______________________________________________ users mailing list users@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/users
