similar to: [8.0.0 Release] One week to the branch

On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:26 AM Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote: > Hi, > > The COFF support in llvm-objcopy is in a pretty half-finished state at the > moment. I had hoped to have it mostly usable for the common scenarios by > the time of the branch (the initial patch was sent at the end of > November), but it's still lacking stripping of sections (while

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019, Hans Wennborg wrote: > On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 12:49 AM Jordan Rupprecht <rupprecht at google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:26 AM Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> The COFF support in llvm-objcopy is in a pretty half-finished state at the >>>

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019, Hans Wennborg wrote: > On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 3:51 AM Martin Storsjö <martin at martin.st> wrote: >> >> FWIW, I've got the main COFF functionality that I had planned on doing >> committed in trunk by now. So at least for my own usecases, it's fully >> functional by now. (And for unsupported options, it clearly errors out.) >>

Currently llvm-objcopy only supports ELF files, and most of it's command line flags are ELF / DWARF specific that don't make any sense on COFF files. So a useful set of options for COFF would be largely disjoint, with maybe 1-2 overlapping options. What would be the best way to add this in llvm-objcopy? I can think of 3 options: 1) Re-write the existing CLI of llvm-objcopy to use

Hello everyone, Here's just a quick reminder that the upcoming release branch is scheduled for creation one week from today, on Wednesday 1 August 2018. Please try to avoid disruptive changes close to the branch. The full release schedule is available under Upcoming Releases at https://llvm.org/ As the branch is created, the trunk version will become 8.0.0. Cheers, Hans

On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:56 AM Eric Christopher via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi Zach! > > I've been thinking a bit about this for a while now and I'm still of two > opinions: > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:21 AM Zachary Turner via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> Currently llvm-objcopy only supports ELF

Hi Zach! I've been thinking a bit about this for a while now and I'm still of two opinions: On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:21 AM Zachary Turner via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Currently llvm-objcopy only supports ELF files, and most of it's command > line flags are ELF / DWARF specific that don't make any sense on COFF > files. So a useful set of

Hi, It's not clear to me what you mean by CLI "subcommands". Would you mind giving a brief example? Up to now, we've been trying to keep llvm-objcopy as close as possible to GNU objcopy, to make transitioning between them easier (I'm thinking in particular things like DWO generation). There are a small number of edge cases/unusual behaviours that we have chosen not to

Hey everyone, Sorry to jump in on this so late. My two cents is that it should remain GNU objoppy compatible most likely. It was always vaguely a desire to have command line compatibility but it has turned out over time that this is actually a crucial feature and should be one of the top priorities. You can't just go into a giant build system and swap out all the uses of GNU objcopy with

LLVM already implements its own version of almost all of binutils. The exceptions to this rule are objcopy and strip. This is a proposal to implement an llvm version of objcopy/strip to complete llvm’s binutils. Several projects only use gnu binutils because of objcopy/strip. LLVM itself uses objcopy in fact. Chromium and Fuchsia currently use objcopy as well. If you want to distribute your build

Hi,   We propose llvm-dwarfutil - a dsymutil-like tool for ELF.   Any thoughts on this?   Thanks in advance, Alexey. ====================================================================== llvm-dwarfutil(Apndx A) - is a tool that is used for processing debug info(DWARF) located in built binary files to improve debug info quality, reduce debug info size and accelerate debug info processing.

On 01.09.2020 06:27, David Blaikie wrote: > A quick note: The feature as currently proposed sounds like it's an > exact match for 'dwz'? Is there any benefit to this over the existing > dwz project? Is it different in some ways I'm not aware of? (I haven't > actually used dwz, so I might have some mistaken ideas about how it > should work) > > If

Hi, On 03/20/2018 06:05 AM, Eric Christopher wrote: > > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 1:57 AM Paul Semel <semelpaul at gmail.com > <mailto:semelpaul at gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > > On 03/15/2018 04:33 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: >> Hi Paul, >> >> >> >> I'm also interested in the command line

Hi Eric, On 03/15/2018 04:33 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: > Hi Paul, > > > >> I'm also interested in the command line replacements for GNU > Binutils : > >> > >> - What tools would you like to replace in priority ? > >> - Does this subject imply to add options/features to some of the > >> tools, or is it only

No, we use msvc cl.exe as a compiler generating C7 debug information (here is more or less our compiler options regarding optimization/debugability): /Z7 /GL- /bigobj /Zo /utf-8 /arch:AVX /std:c++14 /Zc:inline /Zc:ternary /Zc:rvalueCast /Zc:strictStrings /O2 /MD In this list the only weird one is /bigobj, my main fear is that we might get to the limit of sections on an obj and then by adding the

I am looking to create a tool that can add Apple or DWARF5 accelerator tables to fully linked executables that contain DWARF. This will help us benchmark how much accelerator tables can improve the debugging experience as debuggers don't need to manually index all of the debug info during debugging. Looking at how accelerator tables are currently emitted, they seem to be built up as DWARF is

On 01.09.2020 20:07, David Blaikie wrote: > Fair enough - thanks for clarifying the differences! (I'd still lean a > bit towards this being dwz-esque, as you say "an extension of classic dwz" I doubt a little about "llvm-dwz" since it might confuse people who would expect exactly the same behavior. But if we think of it as "an extension of classic dwz" and

On 26.08.2020 10:58, James Henderson wrote: > In principle, this sounds reasonable to me. I don't know enough about > dsymutil's interface to know whether it makes sense to try to make it > multi-format compatible or not. If it doesn't I'm perfectly happy for > a new tool to be added using the DWARFLinker library. > > Some more general thoughts: > 1)

> On Feb 28, 2020, at 11:25 PM, Fangrui Song via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > On 2020-02-28, Greg Clayton via llvm-dev wrote: >> I am looking to create a tool that can add Apple or DWARF5 accelerator tables to fully linked executables that contain DWARF. This will help us benchmark how much accelerator tables can improve the debugging experience as

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 1:57 AM Paul Semel <semelpaul at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On 03/15/2018 04:33 PM, Eric Christopher wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > >> >> I'm also interested in the command line replacements for GNU Binutils : >> >> >> >> - What tools would you like to replace in priority ? >> >> - Does this