Compiling all packages with debug information? - Debian

This is a discussion on Compiling all packages with debug information? - Debian ; Hello everybody! [[ I already sent this mail to debian-user - but it didn't seem to get there. Thinking about it once again, I'm re-posting to -devel. ]] As I'm running unstable I sometimes find bugs in applications. Now it ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Compiling all packages with debug information?

  1. Compiling all packages with debug information?

    Hello everybody!

    [[ I already sent this mail to debian-user - but it didn't seem to get there.
    Thinking about it once again, I'm re-posting to -devel. ]]

    As I'm running unstable I sometimes find bugs in applications. Now it would be
    very nice if there was some way to get the matching debug information for the
    packages, so gdb could print a better backtrace, or eg. show exactly which
    line segfaults.

    Currently I'd have to recompile the packages myself, and installing them over
    the debian files - which is, depending on the package and its prerequisites,
    a major hazzle.


    How about compiling all programs with debugging information, and strip them
    into a "-dbginfo" package, or something likewise for "apt-get source"? Like
    the "-dev" packages only people who think they need them would install them,
    perhaps in a new repository "dbginfo" (like unstable, or testing).

    This would be a good help for determining the location of problems, and would
    not cost the debian maintainers much work.


    Other/better ideas?


    Regards,

    Phil

    --
    Versioning your /etc, /home or even your whole installation?
    Try fsvs (fsvs.tigris.org)!


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  2. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    Hi,

    On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 10:27:40AM +0200, Philipp Marek wrote:
    > How about compiling all programs with debugging information, and strip them
    > into a "-dbginfo" package, or something likewise for "apt-get source"? Like
    > the "-dev" packages only people who think they need them would install them,
    > perhaps in a new repository "dbginfo" (like unstable, or testing).


    This is already done for a number of packages. The package names should have
    the prefix -dbg and install all debugging symbols to /usr/lib/debug/ so
    they are installable with apt-get / aptitude just like any other package.

    However, it is not a requirement yet to have a -dbg package for all source
    packages. People fear that the number of packages (and thus the archive size)
    grows too much. There is an ongoing discussion though about how to solve this
    - I could not find a pointer to it right now though.

    Cheers,
    Sebastian

    --
    Sebastian "tokkee" Harl +++ GnuPG-ID: 0x8501C7FC +++ http://tokkee.org/

    Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
    Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHCfNiEFEKc4UBx/wRAkuMAJ9hUx3+b6dzT1xaxTv+OElicpoc+ACdEhSM
    w1JQh6O2hIT+wrTXY8p8Ozk=
    =KLHw
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  3. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 11:07:47AM +0200, Sebastian Harl wrote:
    > Hi,


    Hi tokkee

    > This is already done for a number of packages. The package names should have
    > the prefix -dbg and install all debugging symbols to /usr/lib/debug/ so
    > they are installable with apt-get / aptitude just like any other package.


    True, true, true... I guess it's a good solution as we have it now, if the
    maintainer thinks a -dbg package would be useful, he/she can create one and
    provide it to the users. I personally wouldn't do that for smaller packages
    which are compiled on "normal modern i386 stuff" in less than 15 minutes because
    I think that in this case the user can do that on his own. For big packages
    (like KDE for example) it's definitively better to have such a -dbg package.

    > However, it is not a requirement yet to have a -dbg package for all source
    > packages. People fear that the number of packages (and thus the archive size)
    > grows too much. There is an ongoing discussion though about how to solve this
    > - I could not find a pointer to it right now though.


    Mhh'k... Archivesize... How many percent of the whole mirrorsize belong to -dbg
    packages?

    Regards,

    --
    .''`. Mario Iseli
    : :' : Debian GNU/Linux developer
    `. `'`
    `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  4. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 11:16:12AM +0200, Mario Iseli wrote:
    > Mhh'k... Archivesize... How many percent of the whole mirrorsize belong to -dbg
    > packages?


    Well, if the whole archive was to have debug packages, they would take a
    significant amount of space.

    Mike


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  5. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    Mario Iseli wrote:
    > True, true, true... I guess it's a good solution as we have it now, if the
    > maintainer thinks a -dbg package would be useful, he/she can create one and
    > provide it to the users. I personally wouldn't do that for smaller packages
    > which are compiled on "normal modern i386 stuff" in less than 15 minutes
    > because I think that in this case the user can do that on his own. For big
    > packages (like KDE for example) it's definitively better to have such a
    > -dbg package.

    Well, not only big packages make problems ... some small programs might need a
    lot of libraries, and recompiling *all* of them is the biggest problem.

    > Mhh'k... Archivesize... How many percent of the whole mirrorsize belong
    > to -dbg packages?

    I'd assume it's not so much the binary size of the packages, but the number of
    them ... that's why I asked whether a new branch might be better for them.
    Like "stable", "testing", "unstable", "experimental" ... "dbginfo". Then
    normal users wouldn't even see this packages.



    Regards,

    Phil

    --
    Versioning your /etc, /home or even your whole installation?
    Try fsvs (fsvs.tigris.org)!


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  6. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 10:27:40AM +0200, Philipp Marek wrote:
    >
    > Currently I'd have to recompile the packages myself, and installing them over
    > the debian files - which is, depending on the package and its prerequisites,
    > a major hazzle.
    >

    The package maintainers provide the debugging information in the package
    (or in a separate package, even) is probably the "best" solution.
    However, you can rebuild the entire package yourself:

    http://people.connexer.com/~roberto/howtos/debcustomize

    That you are not stomping over the files that are tracked by the package
    manager.

    Regards,

    -Roberto

    --
    Roberto C. Sánchez
    http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
    http://www.connexer.com

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQFHCgTc5SXWIKfIlGQRAqjxAKCEuNGd+l+hXiwNMlO4kR 5pAuH+jwCfZihX
    vLKOkLu9Sms4dKYAJfnEsoY=
    =WT7W
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  7. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    On 10/8/07, Philipp Marek wrote:

    > As I'm running unstable I sometimes find bugs in applications.
    > Now it would be very nice if there was some way to get the
    > matching debug information for the packages, so gdb could print
    > a better backtrace, or eg. show exactly which line segfaults.


    Packages built yourself with noopt+nostrip (where supported) would
    produce the better backtraces.

    Ubuntu already creates debug symbols for their whole archive:

    https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ub...er/000195.html
    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AptElfDebugSymbols
    https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu...-debug-symbols

    This would be a nice thing to have in Debian, especially moving dbg
    packages to a separate archive.

    There are some possible problems with this; for eg packages like
    openoffice which are very big and far bigger with debug symbols.

    --
    bye,
    pabs

    http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  8. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    First of all, I think it's a great idea.

    Well, we have the src packages then we only needs other package '-dbg'.
    This one only need to change the options and install the libraries
    needed, It could make all the work to leave the dbg program ready to
    use, and uninstall it only needs to remove the package '-dbg'.

    I think that create this package it's not a lot of work for the
    mantainer and its size will be the smallest XD.


    Sorry for my English, corrections are welcome.


    Michal ÄŚihaĹ™ wrote:
    > Hi
    >
    > Dne Mon, 8 Oct 2007 11:51:12 +0200
    > Philipp Marek napsal(a):
    >
    >> I'd assume it's not so much the binary size of the packages, but the number of
    >> them ... that's why I asked whether a new branch might be better for them.
    >> Like "stable", "testing", "unstable", "experimental" ... "dbginfo". Then
    >> normal users wouldn't even see this packages.

    >
    > It is the size of packages what matters. In most cases debug symbols
    > in -dbg packages much larger than stripped package itself. Just random
    > package that I maintain:
    >
    > $ apt-cache show libgammu2 libgammu2-dbg | egrep 'Package:|^Size:'
    > Package: libgammu2
    > Size: 423010
    > Package: libgammu2-dbg
    > Size: 972178
    >


    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
    Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

    iD8DBQFHDH9RBG3a4ia9y9QRAgi3AJ4xEXf3N82bHixemGGn4O uZEAUDLgCfS7Na
    hamBTJBaoRhBQ6wo2AOK980=
    =BB4h
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  9. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    Carlos San Esteban writes:

    > First of all, I think it's a great idea.


    > Well, we have the src packages then we only needs other package '-dbg'.
    > This one only need to change the options and install the libraries
    > needed, It could make all the work to leave the dbg program ready to
    > use, and uninstall it only needs to remove the package '-dbg'.


    > I think that create this package it's not a lot of work for the
    > mantainer and its size will be the smallest XD.


    The packages would take up considerable space in the mirror network, which
    is not unlimited. It's not about the space consumed on the local system.

    --
    Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  10. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    Russ Allbery writes:
    > Carlos San Esteban writes:


    >> First of all, I think it's a great idea.


    >> Well, we have the src packages then we only needs other package '-dbg'.
    >> This one only need to change the options and install the libraries
    >> needed, It could make all the work to leave the dbg program ready to
    >> use, and uninstall it only needs to remove the package '-dbg'.


    >> I think that create this package it's not a lot of work for the
    >> mantainer and its size will be the smallest XD.


    > The packages would take up considerable space in the mirror network,
    > which is not unlimited. It's not about the space consumed on the local
    > system.


    Oh, your private e-mail helped me understand what you're proposing.
    You're saying that we could set it up so that the local user could build
    the -dbg packages if they need them.

    One difficulty is that in general the debugging symbols from a different
    build will not match the libraries in the Debian archive, so the local
    user would need to build a whole new set of packages and replace the
    packages on their system with them. Otherwise, yes, that would work,
    although we don't really have a good mechanism for Debian packages to
    optionally build certain packages from the same source.

    --
    Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

  11. Re: Compiling all packages with debug information?

    On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 01:03:35AM -0700, Russ Allbery was heard to say:
    > Oh, your private e-mail helped me understand what you're proposing.
    > You're saying that we could set it up so that the local user could build
    > the -dbg packages if they need them.


    At this point, what's the advantage versus just supporting
    DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=debug in more packages?

    Daniel


    --
    To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
    with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

+ Reply to Thread