This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: stabs support in binutils, gcc, and gdb
- From: Doug Evans <dje at google dot com>
- To: nick clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>
- Cc: David Taylor <dtaylor at emc dot com>, binutils at sourceware dot org, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, gdb <gdb at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 20:30:52 -0700
- Subject: Re: stabs support in binutils, gcc, and gdb
- References: <12972.1357230104@usendtaylorx2l> <50E5B73C.firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 9:52 AM, nick clifton <email@example.com> wrote:
>> 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.
> Have you tried using a DWARF compression tool like dwz ?
> Or maybe the --compress-debug-sections option to objcopy ?
Yeah, that would be really useful data to have.
Plus, there's also -gdwarf-4 -fdebug-types-section.
So while plain dwarf may be 8-12x of stabs, progress has been made,
and we shouldn't base decisions on incomplete analyses.
If we had data to refute (or substantiate) claims that dwarf was
*still* X% larger than stabs and people were still avoiding dwarf
because of it, that would be really useful.