[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: default -g ??!?
From: |
MK |
Subject: |
Re: default -g ??!? |
Date: |
Sat, 20 Nov 2010 16:07:05 -0500 |
On Sat, 20 Nov 2010 14:21:27 -0600 (CST)
Bob Friesenhahn <address@hidden> wrote:
> Under a normal operating system (i.e. perhaps not Plan 9, I am not
> sure) the debug symbols are separate from the executable text so that
> the OS will never read the debug symbol area while it is loading the
> program. This means that there should be no performance difference.
If you say so, then I guess I am imagining things ;) I have never
given the issue much thought until now, I suppose I need to do a bit
more research on the issue.
--
"The angel of history[...]is turned toward the past." (Walter Benjamin)
- Re: default -g ??!?, (continued)
- Re: default -g ??!?, MK, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, MK, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, Paul Smith, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, MK, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, Bob Friesenhahn, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, MK, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, Roger Leigh, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, MK, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, Bob Friesenhahn, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?,
MK <=
- Re: default -g ??!?, Miles Bader, 2010/11/20
- Re: default -g ??!?, MK, 2010/11/21
- reword documentation about symbol stripping (was: default -g ??!?), Ralf Wildenhues, 2010/11/21
- Re: reword documentation about symbol stripping (was: default -g ??!?), MK, 2010/11/21
- Re: reword documentation about symbol stripping, John Calcote, 2010/11/21
- Re: reword documentation about symbol stripping, Miles Bader, 2010/11/21
- Re: reword documentation about symbol stripping, John Calcote, 2010/11/21
- Re: reword documentation about symbol stripping (was: default -g ??!?), Karl Berry, 2010/11/21
- Re: reword documentation about symbol stripping, Miles Bader, 2010/11/21
- Re: reword documentation about symbol stripping, Karl Berry, 2010/11/22