Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Debian Kernel (http://www.linux-archive.org/debian-kernel/)
-   -   Bug#365349: linux-image-*-dbg for squeeze? (http://www.linux-archive.org/debian-kernel/336149-bug-365349-linux-image-dbg-squeeze.html)

John Wright 03-04-2010 10:40 PM

Bug#365349: linux-image-*-dbg for squeeze?
 
Hi kernel team,

(Cc-ing -devel to get more eyes on the subject, since I'm soliciting
ideas here... See [1] for some context.)

What would it take to get kernel debuginfo into squeeze? As I
understand it, the main blockers were [2]:

1) It would blow up the archive by ~10 GB
- This is a lot of space, but I believe it's worth it for crash
dump and systemtap support.
2) It would increase the buildd disk requirements as well. Bastion
gave a 30 GB figure, given 8 flavors in a particular architecture.
- Do we have that many flavors for any arch now?)
- Do we have buildd's that are this low on disk space? Couldn't we
upgrade them?

I haven't tried to see if my patch still applies against the current
linux-2.6 packaging. If I made sure it still worked (submitting a new
patch if necessary, of course), would you consider accepting it?

Another alternative would be to turn on the CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO and
CONFIG_KPROBES options, but strip the kernel and modules, but at least
provide some script a user could run to rebuild the kernel with the same
options and compiler to get the debug symbols. Or maybe upload the
debuginfo packages to a separate archive? There was some discussion
about a large data archive a few years ago, and Joerg mentioned in May
2008 that such an archive setup was only a couple weeks out [3]. But I
haven't heard anything since then...

And then there's debug.debian.net - but I suspect that to get kernel
debug symbols into there would require changes both to linux-2.6 and the
scripts that service uses.

Any opinions? Suggestions?

[1]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=365349
[2]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=365349#138
[3]: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/05/msg00970.html

--
John Wright <jsw@debian.org>



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100304234027.GH3086@neptune.jswright">http://lists.debian.org/20100304234027.GH3086@neptune.jswright

Lucas Nussbaum 05-04-2010 04:31 PM

Bug#365349: linux-image-*-dbg for squeeze?
 
On 26/04/10 at 21:01 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
> >> > I wonder what we (as Debian) could do about it. Would it make sense to
> >> > sponsor a very fast machine that the kernel team could use to build the
> >> > kernels and upload from, replacing kernel-archive.buildserver.net ?
> >> The easiest fix is the official blessing by the ftp team to upload only
> >> the architecture independant packages and build all architectures on the
> >> buildds.
> > Ftpmasters, would it be acceptable for the kernel team to upload only
> > the architecture independant packages ?
> > It would allow to provide debug packages on fast architectures without
> > forcing the developers to upload them using their slow internet
> > connections, solving #365349.
>
> There is a "hole" in dak that allows uploading a source that has
> arch:all and arch:any with only source+all. This is not intentional,
> but until now there hasn't been a real need to "fix" this.
>
> There are some developers already "using" this hole to upload in a
> source+all way, having the rest of the packages build on buildds.
>
> This is not entirely the most favored thing to do, for various reasons
> (including bypassing things like lintian checks and not actually showing
> the stuff builds), but is very very low on our todo to fix. For the
> simple reason that the packages uploaded this way simply do not appear
> on any radar. Ie. they are maintained well. No (bad) lintian problem and
> even more important: No build failures, the buildd do not get useless
> work from them.
>
> Provided this will be true for the kernel packages too (ie. they are
> build elsewhere first and its known to work and they don't bypass lintian
> checks that would otherwise do a reject on a sourceful upload) then it
> is acceptable for the kernel team to upload only the architecture
> independent packages, having the rest build on the autobuilders.

Hi Debian-kernel,

How do you plan to proceed?

Are you planning to provide debuginfo packages before the squeeze
release, or only for squeeze+1?

I'd need to know to adjust my efforts on adopting systemtap.

Thanks,
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20100504163118.GA8813@xanadu.blop.info">http://lists.debian.org/20100504163118.GA8813@xanadu.blop.info


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:11 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.