Em Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 11:44:01AM -0400, Samuel Bronson escreveu: > Oops, I sent this to just Arnaldo the first time... sorry, Arnaldo! > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de > Melo<acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > What about my suggestion to change the proposed patch to check if it is > > running on a debian system and if so to avoid checking for libebl? > > Well, that wouldn't really help me with the bisection, though now that I see, you would have to apply the patch at each bisection point and remove it before going forward... But anyway, you don't need to bisect it now, I've fixed it already :) Please do a git pull and check if everything is ok now. > I think about it I could have done that on one of the machines in my > school's CS lab, where I had to build the elfutils libraries myself > anyway... > Anyway, about that idea: Debian hasn't always lacked libebl -- rolling > it into libdw is a fairly recent thing, and back when it existed, both > libdw and libebl were provided as static libraries, so on systems > that still have it, it will probably be necessary to link it in. Not > to mention that having to conditionalize this on the distribution > feels kind of icky, especially considering how hard-to-follow the > REDHAT/FEDORA conditional already is. > > Speaking of the REDHAT/FEDORA conditional, > > (a) why doesn't it have a comment explaining what it's for? -- that > is, what is different on redhat/fedora, and what it does to compensate > for them I'll add the comment now > (b) why is it *after* the check for the "dwfl_module_build_id" > symbol, so that the REDHAT/FEDORA stuff can't fix up the missing > variables and allow the symbol check a chance to run? lemme check... - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dwarves" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
