5 ms·

> * Support for debuginfod, an HTTP server for distributing ELF/DWARF debugging information as well as source code. This is huge! Microsoft's symbol servers ha

> * Support for debuginfod, an HTTP server for distributing ELF/DWARF debugging information as well as source code. This is huge! Microsoft's symbol servers have long made it easier to deal with PDBs. This will finally help with the annoyingness of -debuginfo and -debug Linux packages. Edit: Background on debuginfod: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/10/14/introducing-debuginfod-the-elfutils-debuginfo-server/ https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2019/10/14/introducing-de...

xxpor 6y ago
Is there any other implementation of the same API, but not GPLv3? I'm thinking from LLVM or similar?
- ComputerGuru 6y ago
  I’m a huge proponent of MIT/BSD but I wouldn’t blink twice at deploying this. The code running on your end doesn’t need to be GPL to communicate with a GPL’d server over the network.
  - xxpor 6y ago
    I agree. Explaining that to lawyers is a bit tougher.
    - fnord123 6y ago
      In the early 2000s many lawyers were conservative about these things. These days many lawyers working with technology licensing in businesses are very much up to date. Don't be afraid to keep open lines of communication.
    - pwdisswordfish0 6y ago
      If the lawyers need this to be explained to them, they're not very good at their job.
- blendergeek 6y ago
  Are you hoping to modify it and refuse to contribute your changes back to the community? If not, the GPL will not affect you. If so, does that not feel like mooching off the community?
  - fredsanford 6y ago
    Aren't you assuming the worst here? Why so strident? Maybe his/her employer does not allow gpl software...
    - formerly_proven 6y ago
      > Maybe his/her employer does not allow gpl software... Then they aren't using GCC (or Linux) in the first place.
    - Nullabillity 6y ago
      Then replace "you" with "your employer". The point still applies.
  - xxpor 6y ago
    I don't personally care it's GPLv3. I know given the way I'd use it there's no actual risk, or if I did modify it there'd be no reason not to contribute back. I do care about getting fired for violating company policy. GPLv2 can be approved fairly easily. GPLv3 is a much tougher sell. For example, GCC is fine because there's really no alternative (or there wasn't before clang had full compatibility).
    - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
      Why would GPL 2 vs 3 matter? Is the company doing hardware appliances or something?
      - monocasa 6y ago
        Its probably the patent grant that has their lawyers squeamish.
- CalChris 6y ago
  This is in the works for LLDB. https://reviews.llvm.org/D75750 https://reviews.llvm.org/D75750 The feature itself is multi-platform and is not original to GDB. https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html
necheffa 6y ago
Those packages are separate so you don't have a bunch of debug info laying around that a very small percentage of the user base will use. Hosting this on the web is cute but not as convenient as just a package that can easily be distributed via sneakernet if need be.
- ReactiveJelly 6y ago
  Debian and Ubuntu and them could still host the package in apt, but it's nice that I could download them last-second right when I'm in GDB without fussing with apt.
- statquontrarian 6y ago
  The point is that you can get them on-demand and it doesn't require root privileges. As the Red Hat article notes: > For example, your distro might package debuginfo and source files separately from the executable you’re trying to debug and you may lack the permissions to install these packages. Or, perhaps you’re debugging within a container that was not built with these resources, or maybe you simply don’t want these files taking up space on your machine. Also, FYI, sneakernet is the wrong term for what you meant. Sneakernet is the transfer of files over something other than a computer network (i.e. walking a USB drive to a friend wearing sneakers).
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

xxpor 6y ago

Is there any other implementation of the same API, but not GPLv3? I'm thinking from LLVM or similar?

ComputerGuru 6y ago
I’m a huge proponent of MIT/BSD but I wouldn’t blink twice at deploying this. The code running on your end doesn’t need to be GPL to communicate with a GPL’d server over the network.
- xxpor 6y ago
  I agree. Explaining that to lawyers is a bit tougher.
  - fnord123 6y ago
    In the early 2000s many lawyers were conservative about these things. These days many lawyers working with technology licensing in businesses are very much up to date. Don't be afraid to keep open lines of communication.
  - pwdisswordfish0 6y ago
    If the lawyers need this to be explained to them, they're not very good at their job.
blendergeek 6y ago
Are you hoping to modify it and refuse to contribute your changes back to the community? If not, the GPL will not affect you. If so, does that not feel like mooching off the community?
- fredsanford 6y ago
  Aren't you assuming the worst here? Why so strident? Maybe his/her employer does not allow gpl software...
  - formerly_proven 6y ago
    > Maybe his/her employer does not allow gpl software... Then they aren't using GCC (or Linux) in the first place.
  - Nullabillity 6y ago
    Then replace "you" with "your employer". The point still applies.
- xxpor 6y ago
  I don't personally care it's GPLv3. I know given the way I'd use it there's no actual risk, or if I did modify it there'd be no reason not to contribute back. I do care about getting fired for violating company policy. GPLv2 can be approved fairly easily. GPLv3 is a much tougher sell. For example, GCC is fine because there's really no alternative (or there wasn't before clang had full compatibility).
  - yjftsjthsd-h 6y ago
    Why would GPL 2 vs 3 matter? Is the company doing hardware appliances or something?
    - monocasa 6y ago
      Its probably the patent grant that has their lawyers squeamish.
CalChris 6y ago
This is in the works for LLDB. https://reviews.llvm.org/D75750 https://reviews.llvm.org/D75750 The feature itself is multi-platform and is not original to GDB. https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html

necheffa 6y ago

Those packages are separate so you don't have a bunch of debug info laying around that a very small percentage of the user base will use. Hosting this on the web is cute but not as convenient as just a package that can easily be distributed via sneakernet if need be.

ReactiveJelly 6y ago
Debian and Ubuntu and them could still host the package in apt, but it's nice that I could download them last-second right when I'm in GDB without fussing with apt.
statquontrarian 6y ago
The point is that you can get them on-demand and it doesn't require root privileges. As the Red Hat article notes: > For example, your distro might package debuginfo and source files separately from the executable you’re trying to debug and you may lack the permissions to install these packages. Or, perhaps you’re debugging within a container that was not built with these resources, or maybe you simply don’t want these files taking up space on your machine. Also, FYI, sneakernet is the wrong term for what you meant. Sneakernet is the transfer of files over something other than a computer network (i.e. walking a USB drive to a friend wearing sneakers).

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]