On 08/13/2015 10:58 AM, Leonid Isaev wrote:
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:09:00AM -0700, Joe Julian wrote:
Bandwidth is probably the main problem, although anyone who wants to debug
will probably be fine with that.
I think you guys misunderstood me. The biggest problem IMHO with building debug
versions locally is not compiling itself, but setting up the environment. So, I
meant that packages come with debugging enabled (compiled with gcc -O0 -g and
perhaps ./configure options). This way, there will be not many new packages.
No, the biggest problem with building debug versions locally is that it
takes hours of developer time multiplied by every bug found. Why are we
wasting such a limited resource when it's so easy not to? Life is finite.
That's just pure theory. In practice, the compilation itself is a minor
inconvenience, unless you are talking about Gnome/KDE. But debugging those is
hopeless anyway :)
As a developer, you'll spend most time understanding the changes (looking at
the code), not compiling.
I'm not some newb, maybe google me before you make condescending statements.
There is a reason the other distros publish the debug symbols. It's
valuable and there's no valid reason not to.
Of course, this is not a good idea for things like FF/Gnome/KDE because of a
slow-down, but a performance penalty for smaller programs like vim, links,
XFCE4 etc. will not be noticeable (at least I don't see any for a self-compiled
xfce4 desktop on a single-core Intel Atom based netbook).
Cheers,
What is this slow-down you keep talking about? I'm not asking to do away
with optimization, just give us a way to get the debug symbols without
rebuilding. The debug symbols are located in totally different sections from
the code/data sections. You can check it with objdump:
I was under the impression that with C, -On (n > 0) is not recommended with -g.
Now, I don't know how much -O2 (for example) speeds things up compared to -O1
etc, but probably not much on small applications.
Granted, I think any compiler-level optimization is overrated, and I never
really saw any measurable effect of it. But I use Fortran (not C) for all my
projects.
Cheers,
Yes, if you optimize you will lose some variable data when it's out of
scope. If it's actually about debugging and seeing what's in variables
and stepping through code, that's something that I would likely compile
on my own with O0. Most of the time it's about seeing where the deadlock
or segfault is and getting a meaningful stack trace.
I've seen quite a bit of a performance increase in some cases. GlusterFS
was being built with O0 back in the 2.0 days. Building with O2 proved
about a 30% increase in throughput.
