Re: LLVM strip -x fails

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Palle Girgensohn <girgen(at)pingpong(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Subject: Re: LLVM strip -x fails
Date: 2023-04-20 21:21:08
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2023-04-20 12:43:48 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> The previous complaint about this [1] suggested we use --strip-unneeded
>> for all cases with GNU strip, same as we've long done for shared libs.
>> It's an easy enough change, but I wonder if anyone will complain.

> I doubt anybody wants to strip symbols and keep debug information, so I doubt
> there's much ground for complaints?

Agreed. It doesn't look like --strip-unneeded is a worse choice than -x.

> Oddly the output of llvm-strip confuses binutils objdump enough that it claims
> that "file format not recognized". Not sure which side is broken there.

Not our problem, I'd say ...

> llvm-strip's output is a lot larger than gnu strip's:

... nor that. These things do suggest that llvm-strip isn't all that
close to being ready for prime time, but if FreeBSD wants to push the
envelope on toolchain usage, who are we to stand in the way?

I'll go make it so.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ranier Vilela 2023-04-20 21:33:20 Re: Incremental sort for access method with ordered scan support (amcanorderbyop)
Previous Message Nathan Bossart 2023-04-20 21:16:17 Re: Improve logging when using Huge Pages