On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 06:44:45AM +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote: > > > On 10/04/2016 23:08, Mike Hommey wrote: > > On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 02:28:02PM +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote: > >> > >> On 10/04/2016 08:05, Andreas Tille wrote: > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> > The only use case I could imagine is to create an executable that can > >>> > run outside of Debian. > >> Static builds are still common in (parts of) scientific computing. > >> Two main reasons: > >> > >> (1) When performance matters. Here we need the static library to be > >> built without > >> position independent code. > > That's the funny part. Some use cases require non-PIC static libraries, > > and others require PIC static libraries. Should we then ship both? I > > think we can all agree that would be terrible. So why prioritize one > > over the other? > What uses require PIC static libraries that cannot be satisfied by building > -static --whole-archive ?
https://wiki.debian.org/Hardening#DEB_BUILD_HARDENING_PIE_.28gcc.2Fg.2B-.2B-_-fPIE_-pie.29 Mike
