On 25.4.2014 16:50, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 25.04.2014 16:43, schrieb Petr Spacek:
On 25.4.2014 16:28, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 25.04.2014 16:10, schrieb Petr Spacek:
I'm trying to rebuild bind-9.9.4-12.P2.fc20.src.rpm with
CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $RPM_OPT_FLAGS -O0 -ggdb".
I did the simplest possible thing - edited the original spec file (see spec.diff) and built the package:
$ rpmbuild -ba bind.spec
The package builds and BIND itself seems to work. The problem is that new debuginfo package is missing 118 out of
283 header files in /usr/src/debug/bind-9.9.4-P2.
It seems that "-O0" alone (instead of "-O0 -ggdb") causes the same problem.
I would be glad if anyone can give me advice how to debug this.
Original packages from Fedora 20 (with all headers in /usr/src/debug):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=502596
Packages built with -O0 -ggdb (scratch build):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6778483
just don't do that
I'm going to reproduce and debug issue in named. Do you see any specific reason
why I should use -O2 for serious debugging/development sessions?
no but then don't include $CFLAGS $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
and read compiler warnings
Thank you very much for your very helpful advice! :-)
the debuginfo package is your smallest problem
I'm afraid it is not
please look at the whole picture of the FLAGS you are using
you just kill security features like D_FORTIFY_SOURCE with -O0
warning: #warning _FORTIFY_SOURCE requires compiling with optimization (-O) [-Wcpp]
I think my use case justifies it
but it don't justify incompatible flags
IMHO you enter the area of "undefined behavior" with that
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 is part of the Fedora default flags
For the record, replacing
export CFLAGS="$CFLAGS $RPM_OPT_FLAGS"
with
export CFLAGS="-O0 -g"
doesn't fix the problem.
--
Petr^2 Spacek
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
