@d-e-s-o @ work

Agreed, we most likely should do that.

@mdaverde Are you interested in creating a pull request adding these derives? Should probably include warning on the `missing_debug_implementations` lint.

With https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-rs/pull/266 merged the scope of this issue got reduced to adding a few more `Debug` implementations to `struct`s containing pointers.

Based on https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-rs/issues/163#issuecomment-1006820411 and https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-rs/pull/169#issuecomment-1205832705, I am drawing the conclusion that this pull request seems no longer applicable. Please let me know if that's not the case. Closing.

> @danielocfb I don't think @insearchoflosttime ever had time to work on the static linking, unfortunately. If you don't mind reopening the PR I have time to fix the conflicts...

> @danielocfb when we use static linking, we'll be able to remove -ffile-prefix-map, but I'm not sure how to get static linking working, and this avoids the non-determinism in the...

> Feel free to take this over @danielocfb if you have bandwidth. Sounds good, thanks for the update. Will take a stab at adding static linking support and then we...

FWIW, I finished the implementation [here](https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-rs/pull/323). Feel free to give it a swirl and see if it resolves the problem for you, @jyn514

This should have been addressed by https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-rs/pull/390. Thanks @mendess for getting this done! Edit: That's for reading. I don't believe OP was asking about writing.

> I can PR something to show it working if you think this would be useful. I think that would be great. I am not familiar with either `cargo-audit` or...