This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: PATCH: Compress debug sections for Linux/x86 by default
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Thomas Schwinge <thomas at codesourcery dot com>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 18:35:09 +0000
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Compress debug sections for Linux/x86 by default
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20141214144317 dot GA25790 at gmail dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1412151845470 dot 4719 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMe9rOpz7LMckAmJ6r5gL9=Jaz3F0Hb480UrYSO5v9KoSPBDLg at mail dot gmail dot com> <87tx012qlu dot fsf at kepler dot schwinge dot homeip dot net> <CAMe9rOprYoRMzOA9roJ_OiifSLX+tir+8F6QwhntBwRy+-Hk2w at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 8:18 AM, Thomas Schwinge <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Hi!
> > On Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:04:01 -0800, "H.J. Lu" <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Joseph Myers <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> > On Sun, 14 Dec 2014, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I checked in this patch to compress debug sections for Linux/x86 by
> >> >> default.
> >> >
> >> > I don't think it makes sense for something like this to be
> >> > architecture-dependent. If desired it should be done for GNU/Linux on all
> >> > architectures (and probably for GNU/Hurd, GNU/kFreeBSD etc. - all systems
> >> > with GNU userspace), if not for all ELF targets.
> >> Sure, someone can contribute a patch.
> > I don't like this attitude very much. We should strive to be a bit more
> > cooperative within our own community, at least. As Joseph says, there is
> > no reason to restrict this change -- which, as Joel has pointed out, has
> > not been discussed/reviewed/approved before -- to x86 GNU/Linux only.
> It is next to impossible to get agreements for all targets.
> It is better to start from somewhere. Each target maintainer
> should make his/her own decision.
My point is that agreement for all targets is not what we want anyway.
We should make a decision for the GNU system (or for ELF targets in
general) and then apply that to all targets that are part of the GNU
system (i.e. all with GNU userspace) (or for ELF targets in general). If
an OS maintainer thinks it's bad for their OS, don't enable it there, but
enabling / disabling on a per-architecture (as opposed to per-OS) basis
doesn't make sense without a compelling justification. And we don't have
many OS maintainers.
Joseph S. Myers