From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 7 08:55:09 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18C80F88; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:55:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from theravensnest.org (theraven.freebsd.your.org [216.14.102.27]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8F5110F5; Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:55:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.7] (cpc28-cmbg15-2-0-cust64.5-4.cable.virginm.net [86.27.189.65]) (authenticated bits=0) by theravensnest.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s078t09a042715 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:55:02 GMT (envelope-from theraven@FreeBSD.org) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\)) Subject: Re: [CFT] Update to clang 3.4 From: David Chisnall In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 08:54:55 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <6437A7D3-BB89-4FE6-B44F-46AE4E129F74@FreeBSD.org> References: <541C998A-071A-4917-9D91-DD00CB0E2689@FreeBSD.org> <29C2D69E-9EC8-418D-A333-FC1A8DA2133B@FreeBSD.org> To: Rui Paulo X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822) Cc: freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.org, Dimitry Andric X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 08:55:09 -0000 On 7 Jan 2014, at 06:49, Rui Paulo wrote: > On 5 Jan 2014, at 05:00, Dimitry Andric wrote: >=20 >> I need some assistance with this, from somebody who knows exactly how >> CTF and DTrace work together. Our CTF tools use libdwarf in base, = which >> is also quite old, and seems to be largely unmaintained. It does not >> seem to support anything beyond DWARF2. I think it would be = worthwhile >> to upgrade this library from upstream ASAP. >=20 > Our libdwarf was a from scratch implementation and we never used the = LGPL libdwarf. I don't know if it's worth investing time upgrading our = BSD licenced libdwarf or importing the LGPL libdwarf. Given the push to = keep the tree mostly BSD licenced, I would say the former. LLVM now has fairly complete DRAWF4 parsing support. What interfaces do = the ctf tools need, and are they the only consumers of libdwarf? David