Also expect that cross-distribution support is going to be important. No distribution is an island entire of itself; and few 'customers' use just one distribution. If a lot of distributions have been using this because Fedora had been and it was easier to work out things.. then work is going to be needed to get them to work together..
On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 19:16:32 +0200, Neal Gompa wrote:
> Then that certainly means that Ubuntu uses this too, since they reuse
> the dbgsym subpackage generation for the ddeb system they have now.
I am not much familiar with Debian/Ubuntu but I cannot find any use of DWZ
llvm-dwarfdump -color=0 bluez-dbg_5.55-0ubuntu1_amd64/data/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/*/*.debug|grep DW_TAG_partial_unit
This debuginfo package has been built 2020-09-15.
(Besides that this proposal is not based on whether Debian uses DWZ or not.)
The original language of the proposal said no other distribution used DWZ, and that the format was not adopted and should be removed. So it comes across that it is based on whether Debian, Ubuntu, etc use it.
As the format did
not get widespread and the tool is not much maintained it became
burden to make existing debugging tools compatible with Fedora debug
Almost nobody uses existing Fedora DWZ (only Fedora/CentOS/RHEL and
SuSE OSes) and so its support is missing in tools like
or binutils readelf. -fdebug-types-section is used internally by
Google (produced by clang). Debian does not store any debug info
archives. Ubuntu uses neither -fdebug-types-section nor DWZ.
Just stick to the following:
The tool is not easily maintained, and has become a burden to make existing debugging tools, namely llvm, compatible with this method.