Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 23:48:35 +0200 From: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-stable-10@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r267107 - stable/10/sys/i386/conf Message-ID: <20140607214835.GH679@alchemy.franken.de> In-Reply-To: <652C13FA-F367-4884-BF65-2692E7614F93@gmail.com> References: <201406051308.s55D88mM053472@svn.freebsd.org> <652C13FA-F367-4884-BF65-2692E7614F93@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 09:23:47AM -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> Why? There should be no -gdwarf-2 in the tree, that was a workaround that has since been obsoleted by (a) -g automatically changes to this in the makefile system and (b) the default was reverted back to dwarf 2. This wasn?t a mismerge, but an intentional fix.
Because despite what you say, -gdwarf-2 actually still is in stable/9 and
stable/10 as of now:
marius@alchemy:/home/marius/co > grep -l -- -gdwarf-2 {9,10}/src/sys/*/conf/*
9/src/sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC
9/src/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC
9/src/sys/i386/conf/XEN
9/src/sys/sparc64/conf/GENERIC
10/src/sys/amd64/conf/GENERIC
10/src/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC
10/src/sys/i386/conf/XEN
10/src/sys/sparc64/conf/GENERIC
And also because replacing -gdwarf-2 with -g just wasn't part of r266820,
doing the former when MFCing that revision as r267049 simply was a mismerge
on my part.
Apart from these I'm fully aware that -gdwarf-2 was/is only transient, but
we're just not fully back to -g, yet.
Marius
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140607214835.GH679>