This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ping #3: [RFA] Add --with-libz-prefix option in config/zlib.m4
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Joel Brobecker <brobecker at adacore dot com>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>, GDB <gdb-patches at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2015 13:54:17 -0800
- Subject: Re: ping #3: [RFA] Add --with-libz-prefix option in config/zlib.m4
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150107144548 dot GX5432 at adacore dot com> <20150218120841 dot GD23529 at adacore dot com> <CAMe9rOp9YQrhwwrmqRa+a-04BNvd+p9_MVgxkiVhgt+6TkDb7g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150218165457 dot GU544 at vapier> <CAMe9rOqVim3=-RCuWE6GnMKoQ1v9WKaDqfaS2k8MpDz7rA_y3g at mail dot gmail dot com> <20150218194443 dot GW544 at vapier> <CAMe9rOqB=zd21_q_C3OGVveza8-y44L2_VntsBZ=C=iBQaaDEA at mail dot gmail dot com> <1424291541 dot 23458 dot 28 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org> <CAMe9rOow3D--tayrR6y_qxoZqXZAZh4g0f9qo8Jd+hYdORRMJQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <1424295643 dot 23458 dot 30 dot camel at bordewijk dot wildebeest dot org>
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 1:40 PM, Mark Wielaard <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-02-18 at 12:53 -0800, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Mark Wielaard <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> > That doesn't seem like a smart default. And why is is Linux/x86 only?
>> > Shouldn't that be something that is done explicitly by a distro
>> > configuring binutils after making sure it actually is beneficial
>> > (debuginfo is often compressed in a different way, on the package/file
>> > level or with dwz). And after making sure all tools actually work with
>> > it? There are various tools that don't handle the .zdebug format like
>> > valgrind. And at least elfutils has trouble with it for ET_REL files,
>> > like kernel modules, because relocations don't actually apply anymore to
>> > the section data as is (but only after the decompression).
>> Now it becomes a monthly topic:
> Thanks, I hadn't seen that before. Alan Modra makes some good points in
> that thread why it is not a good change:
> Do people agree with that? And/Or can the change be reverted for now
> till there is agreement it is a desirable default?
It may not be a good idea for all targets. If you find an issue
on Linux/x86, please file a bug binutils report.