This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: stabs support in binutils, gcc, and gdb
- From: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- To: David Taylor <dtaylor at emc dot com>
- Cc: binutils at sourceware dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gdb at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 17:42:20 +0100
- Subject: Re: stabs support in binutils, gcc, and gdb
- References: <12972.1357230104@usendtaylorx2l>
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 5:21 PM, David Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> What is the status of STABS support?
> I know that there is considerably more activity around DWARF than STABS.
> It appears that STABS is largely in maintenance mode. Are there any
> plans to deprecate STABS support? If STABS enhancements were made and
> posted would they be frowned upon? Or would they be reviewed for
> possible inclusion in a future release?
> [We have copyright assignments in place for past and future changes to
> BINUTILS, GCC, and GDB -- and it took almost 4 years from start to
> finish -- I do not want to ever have to go through that again with the
> company lawyers! So, paperwork should not be an issue.]
> I know that DWARF is more expressive than STABS. And if it didn't cause
> such an explosion in disk space usage, we would probably have switched
> from STABS to DWARF years ago.
> Switching to DWARF causes our build products directory (which contains
> *NONE* of the intermediate files) to swell from 1.2 GB to 11.5 GB.
> Ouch! The DWARF ELF files are 8-12 times the size of the STABS ELF
> If the DWARF files were, say, a factor of 2 the size of the STABS files,
> I could probably sell people on switching to DWARF; but, a factor of 8
> to 12 is too much.
The idea was to have a working DWARF -> STABS translator, eventually
as part of binutils.