Hi - > For dwz --dwarf-5, if it produced a .note.gnu.build-id, it would produce > the same one, but I thought that if I produced that, then consumers could > keep using that instead of .debug_sup which is the only thing defined > in the standard, so in the end dwz --dwarf-5 only produces .debug_sup > on both the referrers side and on the side of supplemental object file > as DWARF specifies.
Right, but build-ids are still in normal binaries -- just not the dwz-commonized files created by "dwz --dwarf-5"? So our toolchains still process build-ids routinely for all the other uses. By omitting the build-id on the dwz-generated files, we're forcing a flag day on all our consumer tools. (Does dwz'd dwarf5 even work on gdb etc. now?) ISTM tool backward compatibility is more important, so I would suggest dwz generate -both- identifiers. - FChE
