Bryce McKinlay writes:
Andrew Haley wrote:
> Anthony Green writes:
> > Now that we have a new libgcj in FC-5, azureus logging seems to be
> > working. I've been comparing log files between Sun JRE and gcj runs,
> > and have filed 1 GNU Classpath bug so far.
> > One thing that is annoying is that I'm not getting line numbers in the
> > azureus debug output. Azureus' calls to
> > StackTraceElement.getLineNumber() always result in -1. I have the
> > azureus debug RPM installed, and just assumed that this would be enough
> > to get line number info. Maybe I'm misremembering all this. Should
> > StackTraceElement.getLineNumber() return good info for bc-compiled code?
> Yes, it should. However, StackTraceElement.getLineNumber() doesn't
> work with separate debuginfo.
We could also solve this by having the Java RPMs strip the rest of
the debug info, but NOT the .debug_line section. .debug_line is
quite compact compared to the rest of the debug info: it adds less
than 1MB to libgcj.so. Is this extra size worth it to always have
stack trace line numbers?
We would want to make sure that we have a fast line number lookup
before doing that, though. Currently, line number lookups have a
big negative performance impact on certain applications that log
stack traces frequently.
Right indeed. If we have a line number lookup of our own, and if it's
fast enough, it can just look in the debuginfo files.