Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

2018-05-15 6:02 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : > On 05/06/2018 11:28 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> >> 2018-03-30 3:01 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from >>> last time: >>> >>> "" >>>

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

2018-05-15 6:02 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : > On 05/06/2018 11:28 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> >> 2018-03-30 3:01 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from >>> last time: >>> >>> "" >>> In Fedora, the debug information is

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On 05/06/2018 11:28 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: 2018-03-30 3:01 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : Hi, This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from last time: "" In Fedora, the debug information is packaged separately (foo-debuginfo) and can be installed

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On 05/06/2018 11:28 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: 2018-03-30 3:01 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : Hi, This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from last time: "" In Fedora, the debug information is packaged separately (foo-debuginfo) and can be installed separately. There's

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On 05/07/2018 07:49 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 11:59 PM Masahiro Yamada < yamada.masah...@socionext.com> wrote: 2018-03-30 21:40 GMT+09:00 Mark Wielaard : On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: I'm still mostly looking for

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On 05/07/2018 07:49 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 11:59 PM Masahiro Yamada < yamada.masah...@socionext.com> wrote: 2018-03-30 21:40 GMT+09:00 Mark Wielaard : On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether this would be

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 11:59 PM Masahiro Yamada < yamada.masah...@socionext.com> wrote: > 2018-03-30 21:40 GMT+09:00 Mark Wielaard : > > On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: > >> I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether > >> this would be acceptable

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 11:59 PM Masahiro Yamada < yamada.masah...@socionext.com> wrote: > 2018-03-30 21:40 GMT+09:00 Mark Wielaard : > > On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: > >> I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether > >> this would be acceptable for merging or if we

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

2018-03-30 21:40 GMT+09:00 Mark Wielaard : > On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: >> I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether >> this would be acceptable for merging or if we should just persue a >> --build-id-salt in binutils. > > Personally I would

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

2018-03-30 21:40 GMT+09:00 Mark Wielaard : > On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: >> I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether >> this would be acceptable for merging or if we should just persue a >> --build-id-salt in binutils. > > Personally I would go with this approach.

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

2018-03-30 3:01 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : > Hi, > > This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from > last time: > > "" > In Fedora, the debug information is packaged separately (foo-debuginfo) and > can be installed separately. There's been a long

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

2018-03-30 3:01 GMT+09:00 Laura Abbott : > Hi, > > This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from > last time: > > "" > In Fedora, the debug information is packaged separately (foo-debuginfo) and > can be installed separately. There's been a long standing issue where only

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: > I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether > this would be acceptable for merging or if we should just persue a > --build-id-salt in binutils. Personally I would go with this approach. It seems simple and it might take years before a new

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

On Thu, 2018-03-29 at 11:01 -0700, Laura Abbott wrote: > I'm still mostly looking for feedback whether > this would be acceptable for merging or if we should just persue a > --build-id-salt in binutils. Personally I would go with this approach. It seems simple and it might take years before a new

[RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

Hi, This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from last time: "" In Fedora, the debug information is packaged separately (foo-debuginfo) and can be installed separately. There's been a long standing issue where only one version of a debuginfo info package can be

[RFCv2 PATCH 0/3] Salted build ids via linker sections

Hi, This is v2 of my proposal to allow unique build-ids in the kernel. from last time: "" In Fedora, the debug information is packaged separately (foo-debuginfo) and can be installed separately. There's been a long standing issue where only one version of a debuginfo info package can be