On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 09:29:45AM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > Dear Debian Mentors, > > I have a specific question with regard to -dbg packages for > libraries. My understanding of generating -dbg libraries is like this: > > 1. We build the package with CFLAGS or CXXFLAGS = -g -O2 (for > optimization). > > 2. We call dh_strip while exluding the dbg package, to ensure that > debugging sumbols are present there. I think the suggestion is for all libraries to use dh_strip --dbg-package or -k.
> Now, my situation is that upstream generates special <pkg>_debug > packages by sending ./configure --enable-debug. While I achieve the > desired result with the CFLAGS mentioned above, upstream fears that > generating the library with debugging symbols first and then stripping > them may result in a slightly reduced performance (it's a numerical > computation library). While I am going to run some tests myself to > verify this, I just wanted to ask the mentors here about their > knowledge of this issue. My *understanding* is that the debug information is in a separate ELF section in the executable. See the "strip" manpage for details, but you can move the debug sections to a separate file, and distribute such files as separate Debian packages. So people who use the library as just a dependency of some other package (and don't have problems so don't need to debug it) just get the lib, and people who develop with it get lib-dev, and also lib-dbg. So I think there should be no performance difference between running with the libraries compiled without -g, compiled with -g, compiled with -g and stripped, and compiled with -g and debug symbols/sections moved to a separate file. It would be neat if you could compare the ELF files using binutils tools. Justin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
