On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> > If the assembly code is not position-independent, you already have a
> > problem here. If it is, then gcc is expected to regenerate the PIC
> > register after the assembly section.
> Last time I checked, it didn't. This seems to be a bug in GCC, and I
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000, Timshel Knoll wrote:
> > If the assembly code is not position-independent, you already have a
> > problem here. If it is, then gcc is expected to regenerate the PIC
> > register after the assembly section.
> Last time I checked, it didn't. This seems to be a bug in GCC, and
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 02:35:43PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> >But sometimes this is just not possible at all (-fPIC eats a whole
> > register and some assembly routines may use all of them), and there are
> > situations where not using -fPIC is
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000 at 02:35:43PM +0200, Simon Richter wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> >But sometimes this is just not possible at all (-fPIC eats a whole
> > register and some assembly routines may use all of them), and there are
> > situations where not using -fPIC is
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> > The latter, I think. Since they aren't really shared libraries you can
> > ignore the other Lintian errors, but this one is different.
>Does anyone remember what the rationale is for having to use -fPIC
> for plugins ? It's not explained in the P
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > E: eggdrop: shlib-with-non-pic-code usr/lib/eggdrop/modules/channels.so
> >
> > so, do i ignore the message, or do i hack Makefile.in to add -fPIC on
> > those .so files?
>
> The latter, I think. Since they aren't really shared libraries you can
> ign
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> > The latter, I think. Since they aren't really shared libraries you can
> > ignore the other Lintian errors, but this one is different.
>Does anyone remember what the rationale is for having to use -fPIC
> for plugins ? It's not explained in the
On Wed, Oct 25, 2000, Josip Rodin wrote:
> > E: eggdrop: shlib-with-non-pic-code usr/lib/eggdrop/modules/channels.so
> >
> > so, do i ignore the message, or do i hack Makefile.in to add -fPIC on
> > those .so files?
>
> The latter, I think. Since they aren't really shared libraries you can
> ig
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:37:01PM -0700, Ian Eure wrote:
> i've got the latest version of eggdrop building ok, after some heavy
> Makefile.in hacking, but lintian is giving me this error:
>
> E: eggdrop: shlib-with-non-pic-code usr/lib/eggdrop/modules/channels.so
>
> so, do i ignore the message,
On Tue, Oct 24, 2000 at 04:37:01PM -0700, Ian Eure wrote:
> i've got the latest version of eggdrop building ok, after some heavy
> Makefile.in hacking, but lintian is giving me this error:
>
> E: eggdrop: shlib-with-non-pic-code usr/lib/eggdrop/modules/channels.so
>
> so, do i ignore the message
hi. i'm adopting eggdrop, while sitting in NM. i've got the latest version
of eggdrop building ok, after some heavy Makefile.in hacking, but lintian
is giving me this error:
-- snip --
E: eggdrop: shlib-with-non-pic-code usr/lib/eggdrop/modules/channels.so
N:
N: The listed shared libraries conta
hi. i'm adopting eggdrop, while sitting in NM. i've got the latest version
of eggdrop building ok, after some heavy Makefile.in hacking, but lintian
is giving me this error:
-- snip --
E: eggdrop: shlib-with-non-pic-code usr/lib/eggdrop/modules/channels.so
N:
N: The listed shared libraries cont
12 matches
Mail list logo
