On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 11:34:50AM -0700, Andi Gutmans wrote: > At 10:04 AM 9/6/2004 -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > >On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, Joe Orton wrote: > > > >> On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 04:41:44PM -0700, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote: > >> > On Sun, 5 Sep 2004, Andi Gutmans wrote: > >> > > Yeah I know non-pic doesn't work on all platforms but I gathered that > >> > > -prefer-non-pic only uses PIC on platforms where non-PIC dso's aren't > >> > > supported. I guess I'm wrong and we do need better autoconf checks. > >> > > >> > I am not sure what -prefer-non-pic does on all the platforms actually. > >I > >> > generally don't trust libtool to get things right without checking it > >> > first. But it could be that simply adding this change as-is would > >work. > >> > Maybe if enough people reading this on non-Linux/FreeBSD platforms > >could > >> > test this and reply back we would get a better idea. > >> > >> -prefer-non-pic will build non-PIC objects even if the platform requires > >> only PIC objects in DSOs (I checked Linux/x86_64). > > > >I am not too worried about Linux. I'd be more interested in seeing if > >libtool gets it right on AIX, HPUX, Solaris and OSX. > > Didn't Joe mean that it's wrong on Linux/x86_64 or am I misinterpreting his > email?
Yup I did mean that. Linux/x86_64 is an example of a platform where you cannot put non-PIC code into a shared object. libtool does honour -prefer-non-pic on this platform, and hence will create broken shared objects. Therefore I would presume that -prefer-non-pic is not safe to use by default in the hope that libtool will prevent you shooting yourself in the foot. joe -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
