← Back to context

Comment by adsharma

10 months ago

I wasn't talking about functional problems. It was a simple observation that big companies were not going to convince Linux distributors to add frame pointers anytime soon and that what those distributors do is relevant.

All of the companies involved believed that they were special and decided to build their own (poorly managed) distribution called "third party code" and having to deal with it was not my best experience working at these companies.

6 comments

adsharma

Reply
starspangled  10 months ago

Oh, I just assumed you were talking about Google's Linux distribution and applications it runs on its fleet. I must have mis-assumed. Re-reading... maybe you weren't talking about any builds but just whether or not to oppose kernel and toolchain defaulting to omit frame pointers?

  • adsharma  10 months ago

    Google didn't have a Linux distribution for a long time (the one everyone used on the desktop was an outdated rpm based distro, we mostly ignored it for development purposes).

    What existed was a x86 to x86 cross compilation environment and the libraries involved were manually imported by developers who needed that particular library.

    My argument was about the cost of ensuring that those libraries were compiled with frame pointers when much of the open source community was defaulting to omit-fp.