Why does gdb now give lots of warnings?

[Neal Becker]

Here is an example:

Starting program: /usr/bin/python 

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/e8/abaa654dc4b17b75c06c866898a17ea06f2bcf.debug
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New process 16964]

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/96/c005fcc474ab8b0d1aa41267111de2f0b647b0.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/cd/19bdc5e57f1a00b2c7b4d6c6d1e3882d199ef9.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/0ad477c75be7d7cbc97c0a6f443746dda98341.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/ea/5b2fb654311e2dc8beacf2f19c1c6d172ba93d.debug
Python 2.5.1 (r251:54863, Oct 30 2007, 13:45:26) 
[GCC 4.1.2 20070925 (Red Hat 4.1.2-33)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license"
for more information.
[New Thread 46912496361856 (LWP 16964)]

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/c2/9e344ac739785880a9e002d775c40d812ce16e.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/e0/db9d3ab515cf9c9b43b4aab98441eb0c5834f4.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/07/4b927efdfa0dbc5902b22369afae444d4f8c4f.debug

[Andrew Haley]

Neal Becker writes:
>  Here is an example:
>  
>  Starting program: /usr/bin/python 
>  
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug 
You haven't installed the -debug packages for the shared libs you've
loaded.  Telling you this isn't a bug.

What *is* a bug, IMO, is that you can't tell which shared libs it's
complaining about.

Andrew.

-- 
Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, UK
Registered in England and Wales No. 3798903

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Jan 04, 2008 at 02:52:11PM +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
>   > warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  You haven't installed the -debug packages for the shared libs you've
>  loaded.  Telling you this isn't a bug.
>  What *is* a bug, IMO, is that you can't tell which shared libs it's
>  complaining about. 
I agree that that's annoying, but you can just enable the debuginfo repo and
then yum install the given missing filename. Yum will work out which package
provides it.

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm(a)mattdm.org          <http://mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>              <http://linux.bu.edu/>

[Jesse Keating]

On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 10:49:15 -0500
Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)mattdm.org&gt; wrote:

>  I agree that that's annoying, but you can just enable the
> debuginfo
>  repo and then yum install the given missing filename. Yum will work
>  out which package provides it. 
You can also just use debuginfo-install <appname> and it will enable
the repo for you and track down all the needed debuginfo packages.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 16:57:20 +0100, Jesse Keating wrote:
>  On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 10:49:15 -0500
>  Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)mattdm.org&gt; wrote:
>  
>  > I agree that that's annoying, but you can just enable the debuginfo
>  > repo and then yum install the given missing filename. Yum will work
>  > out which package provides it.
>  
>  You can also just use debuginfo-install <appname> and it will enable
>  the repo for you and track down all the needed debuginfo packages. 
$ ls -l /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2007-10-21 15:58
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug ->
../../lib64/ld-2.7.so.debug*
tells the name of the already installed library missing its -debuginfo.

$ repoquery -qf /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
glibc-debuginfo-0:2.7-2.x86_64
tells the -debuginfo package name needing to be installed.

# yum install /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
installs the missing -debuginfo package.

The library name was omitted intentionally there as the printed lines are
already too long just to be able to provide the .debug filename required for
`yum install'.

People commonly try to debug with GDB without having the -debuginfo packages
installed so I expected some hint may be useful there.

`debuginfo-install <appname>' may not install the matching -debuginfo version,
there may be multiple simultaneous -debuginfo versions available and/or
installed in the future (F9?).

I am open for some more convenient interface - currently going to print also
the shared library name there.  (GDB cannot print anything about rpms.)


Thanks,
Jan

[Andrew Haley]

Jan Kratochvil writes:
>  On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 16:57:20 +0100, Jesse Keating wrote:
>  > On Fri, 4 Jan 2008 10:49:15 -0500
>  > Matthew Miller <mattdm(a)mattdm.org&gt; wrote:
>  > 
>  > > I agree that that's annoying, but you can just enable the debuginfo
>  > > repo and then yum install the given missing filename. Yum will work
>  > > out which package provides it.
>  > 
>  > You can also just use debuginfo-install <appname> and it will enable
>  > the repo for you and track down all the needed debuginfo packages.
>  
>  $ ls -l /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 2007-10-21 15:58
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug ->
> ../../lib64/ld-2.7.so.debug*
>  tells the name of the already installed library missing its -debuginfo.
>  
>  $ repoquery -qf /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  glibc-debuginfo-0:2.7-2.x86_64
>  tells the -debuginfo package name needing to be installed.
>  
>  # yum install /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  installs the missing -debuginfo package.
>  
>  The library name was omitted intentionally there as the printed lines are
>  already too long just to be able to provide the .debug filename required for
>  `yum install'.
>  
>  People commonly try to debug with GDB without having the -debuginfo packages
>  installed so I expected some hint may be useful there.
>  
>  `debuginfo-install <appname>' may not install the matching -debuginfo version,
>  there may be multiple simultaneous -debuginfo versions available and/or
>  installed in the future (F9?).
>  
>  I am open for some more convenient interface - currently going to print also
>  the shared library name there. 
That would do it.  Something really simple like "Missing debuginfo for
shared object XXXXglibc.soXXX".

>  (GDB cannot print anything about rpms.) 
I'll take your word for that.

Andrew.

-- 
Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, UK
Registered in England and Wales No. 3798903

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:19:42 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>  Jan Kratochvil writes: 
...
>   > I am open for some more convenient interface - currently going
> to print also
>   > the shared library name there.
>  
>  That would do it.  Something really simple like "Missing debuginfo for
>  shared object XXXXglibc.soXXX". 
Suggesting this one?
	Missing debuginfo for shared object ld-linux-x86-64.so.2

There is no easy chance how to install the associated debuginfos using YUM from
such messages.  And `debuginfo-install <appname>' will not work in all cases
- at least not fot dlopen()ed libraries - such as the 'nss*' packages.

Printing the rpm Provides keyword would make it already RPM/Fedora specific
	Missing debuginfo for shared object ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
and still deriving the -debuginfo package name from it is not easy enough.


Possibly printing
	warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2.debug
may be more convenient while still usable for YUM?


It would still print
	warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
if the .debug file exists but it is not matching the required version
- otherwise that would contradict the purpose of the F8 `build-id' feature
	http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureBuildId


>   > (GDB cannot print anything about rpms.)
>  
>  I'll take your word for that. 
OK, you are right Fedora GDB could; the build-id support messages should be
cross-OS ones, this loading feature is still not imported into upstream GDB and
it is heading there.



Thanks,
Jan

[Andrew Haley]

Jan Kratochvil writes:
>  On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:19:42 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>  > Jan Kratochvil writes:
>  ...
>  >  > I am open for some more convenient interface - currently going to print also
>  >  > the shared library name there.
>  > 
>  > That would do it.  Something really simple like "Missing debuginfo for
>  > shared object XXXXglibc.soXXX".
>  
>  Suggesting this one?
>  	Missing debuginfo for shared object ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
>  
>  There is no easy chance how to install the associated debuginfos using YUM from
>  such messages.  And `debuginfo-install <appname>' will not work in all cases
>  - at least not fot dlopen()ed libraries - such as the 'nss*' packages.
>  
>  Printing the rpm Provides keyword would make it already RPM/Fedora specific
>  	Missing debuginfo for shared object ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
>  and still deriving the -debuginfo package name from it is not easy enough.
>  
>  
>  Possibly printing
>  	warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2.debug
>  may be more convenient while still usable for YUM?
>  
>  
>  It would still print
>  	warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  if the .debug file exists but it is not matching the required version
>  - otherwise that would contradict the purpose of the F8 `build-id' feature
>  	http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureBuildId
>  
>  
>  >  > (GDB cannot print anything about rpms.)
>  > 
>  > I'll take your word for that.
>  
>  OK, you are right Fedora GDB could; the build-id support messages should be
>  cross-OS ones, this loading feature is still not imported into upstream GDB and
>  it is heading there. 
Sure, but we could have a simple local message like

Try "yum install
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"

I learnt only today that would work...

Andrew.

-- 
Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, UK
Registered in England and Wales No. 3798903

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:53:09 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>  Jan Kratochvil writes: 
...
>  > OK, you are right Fedora GDB could; the build-id support
> messages should be
>  > cross-OS ones, this loading feature is still not imported into upstream GDB and
>  > it is heading there.
>  
>  Sure, but we could have a simple local message like
>  
>  Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"
>  
>  I learnt only today that would work... 
Such as this one - just for the first such message printed?  I guess changing
the `Missing ...' message itself would be already too OS-specific.

Starting program: /usr/bin/python

Try: yum install /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/e8/abaa654dc4b17b75c06c866898a17ea06f2bcf.debug
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New process 16964]

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/96/c005fcc474ab8b0d1aa41267111de2f0b647b0.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/cd/19bdc5e57f1a00b2c7b4d6c6d1e3882d199ef9.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/0ad477c75be7d7cbc97c0a6f443746dda98341.debug

warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/ea/5b2fb654311e2dc8beacf2f19c1c6d172ba93d.debug

...


Also removing the empty line (despite it may occasionally start in half of the
screen) may help, I guess.


Any other messaging feedback is welcome before it goes upstream.



Thanks,
Jan

[Andrew Haley]

Jan Kratochvil writes:
>  On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:53:09 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>  > Jan Kratochvil writes:
>  ...
>  > > OK, you are right Fedora GDB could; the build-id support messages should be
>  > > cross-OS ones, this loading feature is still not imported into upstream GDB
> and
>  > > it is heading there.
>  > 
>  > Sure, but we could have a simple local message like
>  > 
>  > Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"
>  > 
>  > I learnt only today that would work...
>  
>  Such as this one - just for the first such message printed?  I guess changing
>  the `Missing ...' message itself would be already too OS-specific. 
Perfection would be:

Missing debuginfo for /lib64/libnss_files-2.7.so
Try "yum install
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"

If we can't do that upstream, then the closer we get, the better.  Or
we have a local patch.


>  Starting program: /usr/bin/python
>  
>  Try: yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/e8/abaa654dc4b17b75c06c866898a17ea06f2bcf.debug
>  [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
>  [New process 16964]
>  
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/96/c005fcc474ab8b0d1aa41267111de2f0b647b0.debug
>  
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/cd/19bdc5e57f1a00b2c7b4d6c6d1e3882d199ef9.debug
>  
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/0ad477c75be7d7cbc97c0a6f443746dda98341.debug
>  
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/ea/5b2fb654311e2dc8beacf2f19c1c6d172ba93d.debug
>  
>  ...
>  
>  
>  Also removing the empty line (despite it may occasionally start in half of the
>  screen) may help, I guess. 
It would.

Andrew.

-- 
Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, UK
Registered in England and Wales No. 3798903

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 18:15:00 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
...
>  Perfection would be:
>  
>  Missing debuginfo for /lib64/libnss_files-2.7.so
>  Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug" 
Such two-line message for each such missing file? OK.


>  If we can't do that upstream, then the closer we get, the better.
>  Or
>  we have a local patch. 
Sure `yum install' is not acceptable upstream.  Local patch changing the
wording a bit would be fine (configure.in detection of each specific
OS/installing-tool is IMO not appropriate upstream).


Accepted, F8/F9 update should be fine.


Thanks,
Jan

[James Antill]

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 17:15 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
>  Jan Kratochvil writes:
>   > On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:53:09 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>   > > Jan Kratochvil writes:
>   > ...
>   > > > OK, you are right Fedora GDB could; the build-id support messages should
> be
>   > > > cross-OS ones, this loading feature is still not imported into upstream
> GDB and
>   > > > it is heading there.
>   > > 
>   > > Sure, but we could have a simple local message like
>   > > 
>   > > Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"
>   > > 
>   > > I learnt only today that would work...
>   > 
>   > Such as this one - just for the first such message printed?  I guess changing
>   > the `Missing ...' message itself would be already too OS-specific.
>  
>  Perfection would be:
>  
>  Missing debuginfo for /lib64/libnss_files-2.7.so
>  Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"
>  
>  If we can't do that upstream, then the closer we get, the better.  Or
>  we have a local patch. 
 Well what we really want here is:

 Try "debuginfo-install glibc" (or "debuginfo-install python" if they
are running gdb on that), but that requires some kind of integration
with rpm or yum.

-- 
James Antill <james.antill(a)redhat.com&gt;
Red Hat

[Tom London]

On Jan 4, 2008 10:27 AM, James Antill <james.antill(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 17:15 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
>  > Jan Kratochvil writes:
>  >  > On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 17:53:09 +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>  >  > > Jan Kratochvil writes:
>  >  > ...
>  >  > > > OK, you are right Fedora GDB could; the build-id support messages
> should be
>  >  > > > cross-OS ones, this loading feature is still not imported into
> upstream GDB and
>  >  > > > it is heading there.
>  >  > >
>  >  > > Sure, but we could have a simple local message like
>  >  > >
>  >  > > Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"
>  >  > >
>  >  > > I learnt only today that would work...
>  >  >
>  >  > Such as this one - just for the first such message printed?  I guess changing
>  >  > the `Missing ...' message itself would be already too OS-specific.
>  >
>  > Perfection would be:
>  >
>  > Missing debuginfo for /lib64/libnss_files-2.7.so
>  > Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug"
>  >
>  > If we can't do that upstream, then the closer we get, the better.  Or
>  > we have a local patch.
>
>   Well what we really want here is:
>
>   Try "debuginfo-install glibc" (or "debuginfo-install python" if
> they
>  are running gdb on that), but that requires some kind of integration
>  with rpm or yum.
>  
Interesting.....

I tried 'debuginfo-install rhythmbox' and got a list of 43 packages..... cool.

However, it looks like it wants to install 3 'real' packages:

Installing:
 GConf2-debuginfo        i386       2.20.1-4.fc9
development-debuginfo  553 k
 ORBit2-debuginfo        i386       2.14.10-2.fc8
development-debuginfo  838 k
<<<<<SNIP>>>>>
Installing for dependencies:
 avahi-gobject           i386       0.6.22-4.fc9     development        26 k
 avahi-qt3               i386       0.6.22-4.fc9     development        19 k
 minizip                 i386       1.2.3-16.fc9     development        23 k

That seems strange to me.  Is that to be expected?

tom
-- 
Tom London

[James Antill]

On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 10:45 -0800, Tom London wrote:

>  Interesting.....
>  
>  I tried 'debuginfo-install rhythmbox' and got a list of 43 packages..... cool.
>  
>  However, it looks like it wants to install 3 'real' packages: 
 Well yum is just following the deps, for instance for me check,
check-devel and gstreamer-devel are the top three installs ... which is
because gstreamer-debuginfo requires gstreamer-devel, which is obviously
required by rhythmbox.
 I'd say it's likely that we have some unneeded deps. on some of the
-devel packages (maybe should be BuildRequires?) ... on the other hand
it's not something that'll affect normal[1] users.

[1] If you want to use gdb, you aren't normal :).

-- 
James Antill <james.antill(a)redhat.com&gt;
Red Hat

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:40:18 +0100, James Antill wrote:
...
>  which is because gstreamer-debuginfo requires gstreamer-devel, which
> is
>  obviously required by rhythmbox. 
What is the reason why any *-debuginfo package requires any binary package?

Sure it installs .debug files which are only partially usable (officially not
usable) without their binary counterparts.  But still even this dependency is
currently not complete there, I am not aware which rule generates the current
dependencies but it seems as useless there; going to submit the patch.


Regards,
Jan

--- /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/macros-orig	2007-07-05 20:34:42.000000000 +0200
+++ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/macros	2008-01-04 21:03:11.000000000 +0100
@@ -106,6 +106,7 @@
 %package debuginfo \
 Summary: Debug information for package %{name}\
 Group: Development/Debug\
+AutoReq: no\
 %description debuginfo\
 This package provides debug information for package %{name}.\
 Debug information is useful when developing applications that use this\

[Roland McGrath]

>  --- /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/macros-orig	2007-07-05 20:34:42.000000000
> +0200
>  +++ /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/macros	2008-01-04 21:03:11.000000000 +0100 
/usr/lib/rpm/macros has a better definition that uses "AutoReqProv: 0".
redhat-rpm-config should change to match (or better, change not to
duplicate the details).  (The only intended difference is "debug" vs
"debuginfo", and maybe rpm can change that too.)

[Jan Kratochvil]

Hi,

the original problem:

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:44:12 +0100, Neal Becker wrote:
>  Here is an example:
>
>  Starting program: /usr/bin/python
>
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>
>  warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/e8/abaa654dc4b17b75c06c866898a17ea06f2bcf.debug
>  [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
>  [New process 16964] 

Sorry for the delay, it is now hopefully improved in updates-testing:

Fedora 8: gdb-6.6-42.fc8 
	http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=32829
	https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F8/pending/gdb-6.6-42.fc8

Rawhide: gdb-6.7.1-11.fc9
	http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=32798


On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:27:07 +0100, James Antill wrote:
>  On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 17:15 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote: 
...
>  > Perfection would be:
>  > 
>  > Missing debuginfo for /lib64/libnss_files-2.7.so
>  > Try "yum install
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/72/67a2ecd318b0f87a0747a6986d0d6dc01c6d8d.debug" 
It now prints:
	Missing separate debuginfo for /usr/lib64/libX11.so.6
	Try: yum --enablerepo='*-debuginfo' install
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/5c/a8a05c48617a1c4a32acda9f5651f78b4fe005

(more cut-n-paste friendly)


>  > If we can't do that upstream, then the closer we get, the
> better.  Or
>  > we have a local patch. 
Yes, it will have to be split now into two parts, upstream one + a distro one.


>   Well what we really want here is:
>  
>   Try "debuginfo-install glibc" (or "debuginfo-install python" if
> they
>  are running gdb on that), 
If some installed rpm matches the file it now prints the message:
	Getting all the debuginfos: debuginfo-install xorg-x11-apps
(If the rpm database is locked it just prints a warning without waiting on it.)


On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:45:04 +0100, Tom London wrote:
...
>  I tried 'debuginfo-install rhythmbox' and got a list of 43
> packages..... cool.
>  
>  However, it looks like it wants to install 3 'real' packages: 
This problem was submitted as:
	https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427579


Regards,
Jan

[David Nielsen]

fre, 04 01 2008 kl. 14:52 +0000, skrev Andrew Haley:
>  Neal Becker writes:
>   > Here is an example:
>   > 
>   > Starting program: /usr/bin/python 
>   > 
>   > warning: Missing the separate debug info file:
> /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/fa/841219472d35412ad631ad0f0fabb78e5c1957.debug
>  
>  You haven't installed the -debug packages for the shared libs you've
>  loaded.  Telling you this isn't a bug.
>  
>  What *is* a bug, IMO, is that you can't tell which shared libs it's
>  complaining about. 
Sounds like a job for PackageKit, look up the path to figure out which
packages we are missing and offer the user to install the missing debug
symbols.

- David

[Leszek Matok]

Dnia 2008-01-04, o godz. 21:12:58 David Nielsen <david(a)lovesunix.net&gt;
napisał(a):

>  Sounds like a job for PackageKit, look up the path to figure out
> which
>  packages we are missing and offer the user to install the missing debug
>  symbols. 
I DREAM about gdb stopping at a missing debuginfo, downloading repository
meta-data, proposing downloading of 70 packages and asking me if I want to
continue with the downloading and installing. Especially scripted gdb
incantations will be happy (if you think you don't use any, remember
bug-buddy).

Please leave gdb to professionals and don't break it with your
(smarter than the user) hacks.

BTW: "yum install /usr/lib/debug..." won't work on the default
installation.
You need "yum
--enablerepo={fedora|development|updates|updates-testing}-debuginfo
install...". That's why debuginfo-install should be taught to understand file
paths as its argument (if it doesn't already).

Also, if you really want to be helpful, tell user to "add-shared-symbol-files"
after he installs debuginfo packages in another shell. If that works, that is,
I've never tested.

Lam