Hi, 2016-10-27 4:03 GMT+02:00 Steve M. Robbins <st...@sumost.ca>: > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 05:26:24AM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > >> My point was that, yes we have changed to generating relocatable code >> but that is still targetted for executables only, which preserves the >> current behavior, [...] > > But something must have changed with how a static lib is now compiled, > because (a) I see bug reports saying "foo broke because static libbar > is not -fPIC" and (b) the recommended fix is to rebuild libbar with > the new toolchain -- with no source changes. > > So what's going on with static libs?
As a preparation for the transition I suggested using PIC for static libraries for some packages and also suggested changing the Policy to be more liberal about that. (#837478) I followed the current Policy and opened discussion on debian-devel before enabling PIC in the affected packages: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2016/09/msg00277.html I have updated some of the affected packages according the current Policy. A few weeks later Adrian shared his concerns with this approach and preferred simple binNMU-s for affected static librarie because it also fixes the build issues. The reasoning can be read in the same bug. Some binNMU-s already took place. Adrian also filed bugs for reverting the changes enabling PIC for static libraries. This is where we are now. I guess the rest of the binNMUs will take place soonish. The Policy may or may not be changed depending on new inputs in #837478. Cheers, Balint
