debug symbols for gnome apps

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

debug symbols for gnome apps

Stephen Kennedy-4

When a gnome app crashes (as my evolution is now doing with LDAP)
the stack traces aren't very informative and it's difficult to
give an informative bug report.

I would love to see all gnome apps have packages for symbols.
Or even better to be included in the default package if the
space cost isn't too great.

What do you think?
Stephen.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Loïc Minier
        Hi,

On Fri, Mar 10, 2006, Stephen Kennedy wrote:
> What do you think?

 Yes, that would be nice.  There are some technical limitations though:
 - Packages.gz would grow a bit more, and people are already living in
   pain because of its huge size
 - it probably requires building the packages two times (one optimized
   version without debugging symbols, one non-optimized with them), and
   would hit the slow arches horribly
 - means more overhead to the packagers / maintainers in maintaining
   such as setup (dependencies, conflicts and stuff)

 I think this should be implemented outside of the archive, eg. in some
 additional repository, perhaps for popular arches only (did I say
 i386?).  The procedure would be similar to backports, and one would
 simply have to rebuild the source with:
    DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="nostrip noopt"

   Bye,

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Michel Dänzer-3
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 15:17 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:

>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2006, Stephen Kennedy wrote:
> > What do you think?
>
>  Yes, that would be nice.  There are some technical limitations though:
>  - Packages.gz would grow a bit more, and people are already living in
>    pain because of its huge size
>  - it probably requires building the packages two times (one optimized
>    version without debugging symbols, one non-optimized with them), and
>    would hit the slow arches horribly
>  - means more overhead to the packagers / maintainers in maintaining
>    such as setup (dependencies, conflicts and stuff)
>
>  I think this should be implemented outside of the archive, eg. in some
>  additional repository, perhaps for popular arches only (did I say
>  i386?).  The procedure would be similar to backports, and one would
>  simply have to rebuild the source with:
>     DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS="nostrip noopt"

Err, what's wrong with the solution used by e.g. the packages listed by

apt-cache search -- gnome -dbg

?


--
Earthling Michel Dänzer      |     Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer
Libre software enthusiast    |   http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Ross Burton
In reply to this post by Loïc Minier
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 15:17 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
>  - it probably requires building the packages two times (one optimized
>    version without debugging symbols, one non-optimized with them), and
>    would hit the slow arches horribly
>  - means more overhead to the packagers / maintainers in maintaining
>    such as setup (dependencies, conflicts and stuff)

The debhelper magic to produce -dbg packages just needs unstripped
builds, for the main use case (providing a strace trace) the
optimisation level used isn't too much of a problem.

Speaking of which, I should make dbg packages for Sound Juicer...

Ross
--
Ross Burton                                 mail: [hidden email]
                                          jabber: [hidden email]
                                     www: http://www.burtonini.com./
 PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Loïc Minier
In reply to this post by Michel Dänzer-3
        Hi,

On Fri, Mar 10, 2006, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> Err, what's wrong with the solution used by e.g. the packages listed by

 Precisely what I said.  :)

 We do this for a small number of important packages, such as important
 libraries, but it's not something done for all libraries, and even less
 for packages (eg. evolution-dbg, epiphany-browser-dbg, gedit-dbg, ...).

   Bye,

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Michel Dänzer-3
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 16:28 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2006, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > Err, what's wrong with the solution used by e.g. the packages listed by
>
>  Precisely what I said.  :)
>
>  We do this for a small number of important packages, such as important
>  libraries, but it's not something done for all libraries, and even less
>  for packages (eg. evolution-dbg, epiphany-browser-dbg, gedit-dbg, ...).

The only arguably significant problem would seem to be with Packages.gz,
and I'm not sure a couple more -dbg packages would really matter for
that.


--
Earthling Michel Dänzer      |     Debian (powerpc), X and DRI developer
Libre software enthusiast    |   http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=daenzer

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Sebastien Bacher-2
In reply to this post by Stephen Kennedy-4
Le vendredi 10 mars 2006 à 13:51 +0000, Stephen Kennedy a écrit :
> When a gnome app crashes (as my evolution is now doing with LDAP)
> the stack traces aren't very informative and it's difficult to
> give an informative bug report.
>
> I would love to see all gnome apps have packages for symbols.
> Or even better to be included in the default package if the
> space cost isn't too great.
>
> What do you think?

It makes an overload of debug_package * number_of_arch for the archive
and ftpmasters will not like that


Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Loïc Minier
In reply to this post by Michel Dänzer-3
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> The only arguably significant problem would seem to be with Packages.gz,
> and I'm not sure a couple more -dbg packages would really matter for
> that.

 I counted around 130 packages under pkg-gnome, so it's simply not
 something applicable on all of GNOME as is.  Of course we can continue
 adding -dbg packages for the important stuff, it just doesn't scale.
 (And that's only for pkg-gnome!)

 Perhaps the trick used by dbg libs to store only the debugging symbols
 themselves can be used on all packages (without splitting them).  Ross
 seems to think these would be good enough debugging symbols, and this
 would:
 - removes the need of 2 builds
 - removes the pain of maintaining dependencies
 but I have no idea of the size impact.

--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo
El sáb, 11-03-2006 a las 11:26 +0100, Loïc Minier escribió:

> On Fri, Mar 10, 2006, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > The only arguably significant problem would seem to be with Packages.gz,
> > and I'm not sure a couple more -dbg packages would really matter for
> > that.
>
>  I counted around 130 packages under pkg-gnome, so it's simply not
>  something applicable on all of GNOME as is.  Of course we can continue
>  adding -dbg packages for the important stuff, it just doesn't scale.
>  (And that's only for pkg-gnome!)
>
>  Perhaps the trick used by dbg libs to store only the debugging symbols
>  themselves can be used on all packages (without splitting them).  Ross
>  seems to think these would be good enough debugging symbols, and this
>  would:
>  - removes the need of 2 builds
>  - removes the pain of maintaining dependencies
>  but I have no idea of the size impact
  The problem with using dh_strip and keeping symbols around is that it
does not enable  all debug help that can be included in the software. Of
course, that will make backtraces sent by users much more interesting
and helpful. But anyway, adding ~200 -dbg packages is something I think
should be thinked and asked to ftp-masters.

  As a perhaps crazy idea, debug symbols should be kept in something
like dbg.debian.org... at least for not core packages.

  Cheers,

--
Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo
   [hidden email]

signature.asc (198 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Loïc Minier
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006, Jose Carlos Garcia Sogo wrote:
>   The problem with using dh_strip and keeping symbols around is that it
> does not enable  all debug help that can be included in the software. Of
> course, that will make backtraces sent by users much more interesting
> and helpful. But anyway, adding ~200 -dbg packages is something I think
> should be thinked and asked to ftp-masters.

 Yes, that's why in my last message I said that 130 new packages were
 too many, but it would be ok to have the debugging symbols below
 /usr/lib/debug (if that's always possible, and doesn't eat too much
 space[1]).

>   As a perhaps crazy idea, debug symbols should be kept in something
> like dbg.debian.org... at least for not core packages.

 This is how I would see it too, it has all advantages:
 - full rebuild is possible
 - permit selection of preferred arches (i386 only for example)
 - does not eat space on mirrors and end-user systems, nor burdens
   Packages.gz

[1] I have a /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/nautilus here (from nautilus-dbg):
bee% du -hs /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/nautilus /usr/bin/nautilus
1,6M    /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/nautilus
608K    /usr/bin/nautilus
--
Loïc Minier <[hidden email]>
Current Earth status:   NOT DESTROYED


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [hidden email]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: debug symbols for gnome apps

Mark Howard-4
The following ubuntu specification contains an interesting
implementation for debug packages. It requires only changes to
debhelper and a new dbg pool somewhere. It looks like it would provide
debug info for all relevant packages, which has the added bonus that
the current -dbg files could be removed making the archive and
packages files smaller.
It looks like ubuntu aren't planning to implement it themselves (in
the current release cycle at least), but they have spent some time at
least thinking of the details.

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/AutomatedProblemReports