On 11/13/2012 10:23 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: >> Sometimes things aren't ideal for one group in favor of another. > > WHAT group is actually in favor of MiniDebugInfo? It has one single person > as the feature owner. ABRT developers consider it useless. Who actually > wants it? And are you sure those who think they want it realize what it > really means? > > Let's take a simple example: > $ gdb --args sleep 10 > (gdb) r > (press Ctrl-C) > (gdb) bt > #0 0xb7fdc424 in __kernel_vsyscall () > #1 0xb7eb94f0 in __nanosleep_nocancel () from /lib/libc.so.6 > #2 0x0804b232 in ?? () > #3 0x08048f99 in ?? () > #4 0xb7e166b3 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 > #5 0x08049085 in ?? () > > What MiniDebugInfo will give you (not tested): > #0 0xb7fdc424 in __kernel_vsyscall () > #1 0xb7eb94f0 in __nanosleep_nocancel () from /lib/libc.so.6 > #2 0x0804b232 in xnanosleep () from /usr/bin/sleep > #3 0x08048f99 in main () from /usr/bin/sleep > #4 0xb7e166b3 in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 > #5 0x08049085 in ?? () > > With coreutils-debuginfo, glibc-debuginfo and glibc-debuginfo-common > installed: > #0 0xb7fdc424 in __kernel_vsyscall () > #1 0xb7eb94f0 in __nanosleep_nocancel () > at ../sysdeps/unix/syscall-template.S:82 > #2 0x0804b232 in xnanosleep (seconds=10) at xnanosleep.c:111 > #3 0x08048f99 in main (argc=2, argv=0xbfffef24) at sleep.c:147 > > Spot the difference… I just did. You seem to have proved the point of mini-debuginfo. Andrew. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
