[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gdb] debug level versus size
From: |
Bahadir Balban |
Subject: |
[Gdb] debug level versus size |
Date: |
Fri, 7 Jan 2005 11:40:22 +0000 |
Hi,
I have a buggy executable and to figure out the bug I needed to use a
stack trace. For this purpose I compiled my application with debug
support but the exe size is 94,5MB compared to optimised one that is
7,4MB. Unfortunately I cannot run it now due to insufficient memory.
What flags/configure options should I use to get an exe capable of
giving a meaningful stack trace with a smaller binary size?
I used the following configure options for the large debug-enabled binary:
# code generation options (optimize for size)
#ac_add_options --enable-optimize=-Os
#ac_add_options --enable-strip
#ac_add_options --disable-debug
ac_add_options --enable-debug
#ac_add_options --enable-reorder
#ac_add_options --enable-elf-dynstr-gc
#ac_add_options --disable-dtd-debug
ac_add_options --enable-dtd-debug # ENABLE DTD DEBUG
ac_add_options --disable-logging
ac_add_options --disable-tests
# enable static build (exists for both debug and non-debug)
ac_add_options --disable-shared
ac_add_options --enable-static
which resulted in the following flags during compilation:
-DDEBUG -D_DEBUG -D_DEBUG_root -D_TRACING and -g.
Many thanks,
Bahadir
- [Gdb] debug level versus size,
Bahadir Balban <=