Revert "Use llvm-objcopy on Linux x64 (#48444)"

[jkotas]

This reverts commit ba50840.

[ghost]

I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this PR. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label.

[sebastienros]

Would there be any doubt and someone can build the impacted files for me then I can verify the change.

[jkotas]

I will check the build artifacts once the build is green.

[jkotas]

cc @am11

[am11]

It is one of those things, you can't verify locally. e.g. before and after my commit, as well as the master branch, the size of libcoreclr.so on linux-x64 is 6.8M.

My guess is that we need to check the dotnet/installer build if we are really using llvm v9x or higher there for linux-x64.

[jkotas]

It is one of those things, you can't verify locally. e.g. before and after my commit, as well as the master branch, the size of libcoreclr.so on linux-x64 is 6.8M.

You should be able to use the docker image used by the CI to exactly replicate what the build does:

mcr.microsoft.com/dotnet-buildtools/prereqs:centos-7-20201227183837-5fe0e50

I do not think that the problem is in dotnet/installer. I see that the dotnet/runtime build is not stripping the .so as before. Let me know if you have are not able to replicate the problem using the docker image above.

[jkotas]

I have built current main and this PR on mcr.microsoft.com/dotnet-buildtools/prereqs:centos-7-20201227183837-5fe0e50 docker image locally to verify that the problem can be reproduced:

Current main:

[root@3ffd9021d6f4 runtime]# cd /runtime/artifacts/bin/coreclr/Linux.x64.Release
[root@3ffd9021d6f4 Linux.x64.Release]# ls -la libcoreclr*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 99492216 Mar 3 23:36 libcoreclr.so
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 101239976 Mar 3 23:36 libcoreclr.so.dbg

With this revert:

[root@53b120e70d17 Linux.x64.Release]# ls -la libcoreclr*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 7183624 Mar 3 23:38 libcoreclr.so
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 94112016 Mar 3 23:38 libcoreclr.so.dbg

[ghost]

Hello @jkotas!

Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.

p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.

[am11]

I haven't tried on that centos docker. I used Ubuntu 20.04 VM for my findings.

$ du -b artifacts/bin/coreclr/Linux.x64.Release/libcoreclr.so
7046336 artifacts/bin/coreclr/Linux.x64.Release/libcoreclr.so

[jkotas]

@am11 Could you please take a look and re-submit the change with the fix for the size regression? Thank you!