Re: [PATCH] [makedumpfile] Follow debuginfo link of vmlinux file

["Ken'ichi Ohmichi" <oomichi@mxs.nes.nec.co.jp>]

Hi Jay,

Sorry for the late response.

2007/05/24 12:44:26 -0700, Jay Lan <jlan@sgi.com> wrote:
>Bernhard Walle wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> * Dave Anderson <anderson@redhat.com> [2007-05-24 20:31]:
>>> The crash utility hides the details of there being a separate debug
>>> file in the same way the gdb does when working with a binary executable
>>> that has a separate debuginfo file.  It tries *not* to be ambiguous,
>>> i.e., the point is to stay true to the "crash vmlinux vmcore" model.
>> 
>> It's documented in the GDB documentation:
>> http://sourceware.org/gdb/current/onlinedocs/gdb_16.html#SEC154
>
>Thanks for the pointer, Bernhard. I installed kernel-debuginfo rpm
>but crash still failed to find the debug information... I had to
>copy the kernel-<version>.debug to /boot for it to work.
>
>So, i think it is a good idea for makedumpfile to follow the same
>convension as crash and gdb, Ken'ichi?

No, I don't think it is worthy that a kernel file is specified *only*
for getting the path to a debuginfo file. It is smart to specify
a debuginfo file directly.  The crash utility needs both a kernel
file and a debuginfo file, but makedumpfile needs only a debuginfo
file as I said.

BTW, I recommend using a makedumpfile's CONFIGFILE instead of a
debuginfo file.  If a system has a CONFIGFILE, makedumpfile can
run without a debuginfo file.  It is smaller than a debuginfo file,
and it is easy to distribute it to each system.
I don't think each system should have a debuginfo file, because the
file is big and a user may analyze a dumpfile on a remote analysis
system. 


Thanks
Ken'ichi Ohmichi

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec