Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Generate pdb file when strip=debuginfo #123031

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

ChrisDenton
Copy link
Member

@ChrisDenton ChrisDenton commented Mar 25, 2024

For msvc targets, treat strip=debuginfo the same as strip=none. See #122857 for why this is important. We should definitely not be stripping symbol names from external debug files in this case.

This is a much more minimal version of #115120. It only affects strip=debuginfo and nothing else.

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Mar 25, 2024

r? @estebank

rustbot has assigned @estebank.
They will have a look at your PR within the next two weeks and either review your PR or reassign to another reviewer.

Use r? to explicitly pick a reviewer

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Mar 25, 2024
@michaelwoerister
Copy link
Member

Thanks for opening the PR, @ChrisDenton!

cc @rust-lang/wg-debugging

r? @michaelwoerister

@rustbot rustbot assigned michaelwoerister and unassigned estebank Mar 25, 2024
@michaelwoerister
Copy link
Member

@ChrisDenton, given that the immediate regression reported in #122857 is being addressed by the fix in Cargo, I'd prefer if we fixed the rustc side via #115120, which already has an MCP attached. It might take a bit longer to get #115120 merged, but I think even for this PR (#123031), we'd need to do an FCP and I'd like to avoid the organizational churn. I'll push for #115120 being resolved asap.

What do you think?

@ChrisDenton
Copy link
Member Author

Sure. I'm ok with that. I do think the current behaviour of rustc itself is wrong but it's a long standing issue (cargo changes aside) so taking the time to do it right makes sense to me.

And personally I'll admit to always building with debug info so this isn't urgent for me.

@ChrisDenton ChrisDenton deleted the no-strip branch March 27, 2024 09:18
@michaelwoerister
Copy link
Member

Let's see if we can push #115120 over the finish line 🙂
#115120 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants