dtrace discuss - Aug 2006 - Stripped binaries

Hi,

While trying to nail down a bug, I had to dtrace devfsadm on both nevada 
and S10U2. I was not seeing lots of function calls on S10U2 and after 
wasting a fair amount of time, I realised that I was dtracing a stripped 
binary. :)

That brings me to my question. Do we (Sun/Solairs) really have to ship 
stripped binaries? I am surprised that we still do.

For example:
bash-3.00# file /usr/sbin/devfsadm
/usr/sbin/devfsadm:     ELF 32-bit MSB executable SPARC Version 1, 
dynamically linked, stripped
bash-3.00# file /usr/bin/* | grep "not stripped"  | wc -l
      200
bash-3.00# file /usr/bin/* | grep -v "not stripped"  | grep stripped |
wc -l
      513

Don''t we care enough about the observability that the symbols provide??

Regards,
Manoj

>While trying to nail down a bug, I had to dtrace devfsadm on both nevada 
>and S10U2. I was not seeing lots of function calls on S10U2 and after 
>wasting a fair amount of time, I realised that I was dtracing a stripped 
>binary. :)
>
>That brings me to my question. Do we (Sun/Solairs) really have to ship 
>stripped binaries? I am surprised that we still do.
No.
>For example:
>bash-3.00# file /usr/sbin/devfsadm
>/usr/sbin/devfsadm:     ELF 32-bit MSB executable SPARC Version 1, 
>dynamically linked, stripped
>bash-3.00# file /usr/bin/* | grep "not stripped"  | wc -l
>      200
>bash-3.00# file /usr/bin/* | grep -v "not stripped"  | grep
stripped | wc -l
>      513
>
>Don''t we care enough about the observability that the symbols
provide??

Yes; same commands in b45:

file /usr/bin/* | grep "not stripped"  | wc -l
     724
file /usr/bin/* | grep -v "not stripped"  | grep stripped | wc -l
      73


(SFW, GNOME, install, packaging tools)

We''re fixing this but we won''t fix this for S10.

Casper