Features/DebugInfoRevamp

From FedoraProject

< Features(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 12: Line 12:
 
== Current status ==
 
== Current status ==
 
* Targeted release: [[Releases/11 | 11 ]]
 
* Targeted release: [[Releases/11 | 11 ]]
* Last updated: (DATE)
+
* Last updated: 2008-12-10
 
* Percentage of completion: 0%
 
* Percentage of completion: 0%
  
 
== Detailed Description ==
 
== Detailed Description ==
 
New work in elfutils will provide facilities for DWARF compression.
 
New work in elfutils will provide facilities for DWARF compression.
 +
The conventions for finding separate debuginfo files might be enhanced
 +
or rejiggered in tools like gdb and systemtap.  The rpmbuild macros
 +
and scripts for generating debuginfo packages will be rewritten.
 +
These are expected to make the debuginfo rpms much smaller.
  
 +
Possibly the standard will change to split debuginfo packages into
 +
debuginfo proper (/usr/lib/debug files) and sources (/usr/src/debug files)
 +
as separate subpackages.
  
 
== Benefit to Fedora ==
 
== Benefit to Fedora ==
<!-- What is the benefit to the platform?  If this is a major capability update, what has changed?  If this is a new feature, what capabilities does it bring? Why will Fedora become a better distribution or project because of this feature?-->
+
Much smaller debuginfo rpms, quicker to download, smaller to host/mirror, etc.
  
 
== Scope ==
 
== Scope ==
<!-- What work do the developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
+
 
 +
elfutils team has to write the DWARF compression tools (will also replace
 +
rpm's debugedit), come up with debuginfo convention changes.
 +
 
 +
elfutils team + rpm/redhat-rpm-config maintainers have to decide about
 +
subpackage conventions and implement new macros/script to replace rpmbuild
 +
find-debuginfo.sh magic.
 +
 
 +
Either gdb team has to adapt it to new conventions, or DWARF tool + rpm
 +
deployment plan could include exploding in %post to current layout.
 +
 
 +
If rpm subpackage convention changes, possibly rel-eng needs to adjust mash
 +
for new naming convention and multiple debuginfo-related rpms per package.
  
 
== How To Test ==
 
== How To Test ==
Line 42: Line 61:
  
 
== User Experience ==
 
== User Experience ==
<!-- If this feature is noticeable by its target audience, how will their experiences change as a result?  Describe what they will see or notice. -->
+
Quicker to download and install debuginfo rpms.
  
 
== Dependencies ==
 
== Dependencies ==
<!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package?  Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this feature depends?  In other words, completion of another feature owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate?  Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel feature)? -->
+
 
 +
elfutils work.
 +
 
 +
Might like a mass rebuild to get all new debuginfo rpms for the release.
  
 
== Contingency Plan ==
 
== Contingency Plan ==
<!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan?  This might be as simple as "None necessary, revert to previous release behaviour."  Or it might not. If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy. -->
+
 
 +
We can punt the whole thing.
 +
 
 +
We can do it but skip the mass rebuild.
 +
 
 +
We can punt adapting gdb et al if we do a deployment scheme that explodes
 +
to compatible old data in %post.
  
 
== Documentation ==
 
== Documentation ==
<!-- Is there upstream documentation on this feature, or notes you have written yourself?  Link to that material here so other interested developers can get involved. -->
 
  
 +
https://fedorahosted.org/elfutils/wiki/RpmDebugInfo
  
 
== Release Notes ==
 
== Release Notes ==
Line 58: Line 86:
 
<!-- The Fedora Release Notes inform end-users about what is new in the release.  Examples of past release notes are here: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/ -->
 
<!-- The Fedora Release Notes inform end-users about what is new in the release.  Examples of past release notes are here: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/release-notes/ -->
 
<!-- The release notes also help users know how to deal with platform changes such as ABIs/APIs, configuration or data file formats, or upgrade concerns.  If there are any such changes involved in this feature, indicate them here.  You can also link to upstream documentation if it satisfies this need.  This information forms the basis of the release notes edited by the documentation team and shipped with the release. -->
 
<!-- The release notes also help users know how to deal with platform changes such as ABIs/APIs, configuration or data file formats, or upgrade concerns.  If there are any such changes involved in this feature, indicate them here.  You can also link to upstream documentation if it satisfies this need.  This information forms the basis of the release notes edited by the documentation team and shipped with the release. -->
 +
 +
Should have some notes about conventions and tools when decided.
  
 
== Comments and Discussion ==
 
== Comments and Discussion ==

Revision as of 04:14, 11 December 2008

Contents

DebugInfo Revamp

Summary

A revamp of the debuginfo rpm generation scheme exploiting new tools for DWARF compression.

Owner

Current status

  • Targeted release: 11
  • Last updated: 2008-12-10
  • Percentage of completion: 0%

Detailed Description

New work in elfutils will provide facilities for DWARF compression. The conventions for finding separate debuginfo files might be enhanced or rejiggered in tools like gdb and systemtap. The rpmbuild macros and scripts for generating debuginfo packages will be rewritten. These are expected to make the debuginfo rpms much smaller.

Possibly the standard will change to split debuginfo packages into debuginfo proper (/usr/lib/debug files) and sources (/usr/src/debug files) as separate subpackages.

Benefit to Fedora

Much smaller debuginfo rpms, quicker to download, smaller to host/mirror, etc.

Scope

elfutils team has to write the DWARF compression tools (will also replace rpm's debugedit), come up with debuginfo convention changes.

elfutils team + rpm/redhat-rpm-config maintainers have to decide about subpackage conventions and implement new macros/script to replace rpmbuild find-debuginfo.sh magic.

Either gdb team has to adapt it to new conventions, or DWARF tool + rpm deployment plan could include exploding in %post to current layout.

If rpm subpackage convention changes, possibly rel-eng needs to adjust mash for new naming convention and multiple debuginfo-related rpms per package.

How To Test

User Experience

Quicker to download and install debuginfo rpms.

Dependencies

elfutils work.

Might like a mass rebuild to get all new debuginfo rpms for the release.

Contingency Plan

We can punt the whole thing.

We can do it but skip the mass rebuild.

We can punt adapting gdb et al if we do a deployment scheme that explodes to compatible old data in %post.

Documentation

https://fedorahosted.org/elfutils/wiki/RpmDebugInfo

Release Notes

Should have some notes about conventions and tools when decided.

Comments and Discussion