guix-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Debugging info unavailability


From: Maxim Cournoyer
Subject: Re: Debugging info unavailability
Date: Tue, 02 May 2017 09:39:57 -0700
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux)

Hi,

address@hidden (Ludovic Courtès) writes:

> Hi,
>
> Danny Milosavljevic <address@hidden> skribis:
>
>> just now I had to debug a doxygen Segmentation Fault.  I tried to install 
>> doxygen:debug but that wasn't available.
>>
>> I think it would be nice if these outputs were available by default (but not 
>> installed by default).
>
> Yeah, on of the reasons this is currently opt-in is disk space on hydra,
> as noted in the manual (info "(guix) Installing Debugging Files").
>
> There’s also the fact that packages that do not use the GNU build system
> will most likely not produce debugging info out of the box, so adding
> “debug” automatically may break many packages.
>
>> If we wanted to do that, we could just adapt
>> guix/build-system/cmake.scm, guix/build-system/gnu.scm and
>> guix/build-system/glib-or-gtk.scm outputs default to say '("out"
>> "debug") instead of '("out").
>
> Rather we should change the default value of the ‘outputs’ field of
> <package>.
>

Adding the "debug" to the default value of <package> would every package
to now have a debug output; isn't this why Danny suggested to only
change it at the build system level? That way nothing which doesn't have
debugging symbols by default would break or have a useless debug output.

Or, was there something with making the change at that level?

> The problem is that we’d have to add a line like:
>
>   (outputs '("out"))
>
> to all the packages that do not provide debugging symbols (such as
> Perl/Python/Ruby packages), which could be a lot of them.  Or we could
> provide:
>
>   (define-syntax-rule (package/no-debug fields ...)
>     (package
>       (outputs '("out"))
>       fields ...))
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Ludo’.

That seems a more invasive/uglier solution to that hinted by Danny? Or am I
missing something? :)

Thanks,

Maxim

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]