We're considering implementing [debuginfod]( https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html) library in LLVM. Initially, we'd like to start with the client implementation, which would enable debuginfod support in tools like llvm-symbolizer, but later we'd also like to provide LLVM-based debuginfod server implementation. debuginfod uses HTTP and so we need an HTTP library, ideally one that supports both client and server. The question is, would it be acceptable to use an existing C++ HTTP library or would it be preferred to implement an HTTP library in LLVM from scratch? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200831/2a060c56/attachment.html>
[+debug info folks, just as FYI - since the immediate question's more about 3rd party library deps than the nuances of DWARF, etc] I'd imagine avoiding writing such a thing from scratch would be desirable, but that the decision might depend somewhat on what libraries out there you/we would consider including, what their licenses and further dependencies are. On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 4:22 PM Petr Hosek via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> We're considering implementing [debuginfod]( > https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html) library in LLVM. > Initially, we'd like to start with the client implementation, which would > enable debuginfod support in tools like llvm-symbolizer, but later we'd > also like to provide LLVM-based debuginfod server implementation. > > debuginfod uses HTTP and so we need an HTTP library, ideally one that > supports both client and server. > > The question is, would it be acceptable to use an existing C++ HTTP > library or would it be preferred to implement an HTTP library in LLVM from > scratch? > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200831/e1e25b0f/attachment.html>
+LLDB Dev <lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> as well for visibility. +Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> since he and I have talked about such things. On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:26 PM David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:> [+debug info folks, just as FYI - since the immediate question's more > about 3rd party library deps than the nuances of DWARF, etc] > > I'd imagine avoiding writing such a thing from scratch would be desirable, > but that the decision might depend somewhat on what libraries out there > you/we would consider including, what their licenses and further > dependencies are. > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 4:22 PM Petr Hosek via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> We're considering implementing [debuginfod]( >> https://sourceware.org/elfutils/Debuginfod.html) library in LLVM. >> Initially, we'd like to start with the client implementation, which would >> enable debuginfod support in tools like llvm-symbolizer, but later we'd >> also like to provide LLVM-based debuginfod server implementation. >> >> debuginfod uses HTTP and so we need an HTTP library, ideally one that >> supports both client and server. >> >> The question is, would it be acceptable to use an existing C++ HTTP >> library or would it be preferred to implement an HTTP library in LLVM from >> scratch? >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200831/74682a1c/attachment.html>