* Paul Jakma wrote on Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 01:19:38PM CET:
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> >Try 'gcc -v' in all cases to see what's happening. Try 'gld
> >--verbose' and 'gcc -v -Wl,--verbose' to see what the linker
> >thinks.
>
> Hmm, ok. It's using the solaris linker. How do
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
I think not. First of all, underscore'd symbols are forbidden
country for non-implementation-tools like libtool. Second, don't
ever use the same symbol for two different meanings, one being,
that GCC tells you this is -fpic, the other being what lib
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
Because: when one day 100 compilers support this, they may use 10
different #defines for this notion. Or not, who knows.
Sure. Then you should possibly also define __PIC__ for completeness /
symmetry? (relying on gcc to provide that at present righ
Hi Paul,
* Paul Jakma wrote on Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 11:43:03AM CET:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> >Because: when one day 100 compilers support this, they may use 10
> >different #defines for this notion. Or not, who knows.
>
> Sure. Then you should possibly also define __PI
* Paul Jakma wrote on Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 07:10:30PM CET:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> >see http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2003-06/msg00145.html ). Or,
> >to not avoid further namespace invasion, maybe `-DPIC -DLT_PIE'.
> >For CC and CXX tags? Suggestions? Maybe only a
Hi Paul,
* Paul Jakma wrote on Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 08:13:14PM CET:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
> >PIE and PIC arent the same thing
> The distinction between the two is mostly important at link-time. Ie
> a collection of PIC and/or PIE objects can be linked together into a
>
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Mike Frysinger wrote:
PIE and PIC arent the same thing
-fPIC is for creating position independent code for shared objects
while -fPIE is for creating position independent code for executables
Right, I did know that ;).
The distinction between the two is mostly important
Hi,
Mike Frysinger wrote:
I don't know, but PIE and PIC don't compile to same thing AFAICT. I
don't know the significance of that though.
IIRC -pie is only a linker flag that
a) affects selection of the linker script
b) disallows certain relocation types
c) notes the position-independence
On Wed, Nov 30, 2005 at 06:10:30PM +, Paul Jakma wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Nov 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> >This seems to me the superior solution. Thus, let's kill the
> >--with-pic idea, too. It won't get us over main.o
> >compiled-without-libtool and neither one of -fpic or -fpie in
> >
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
This seems to me the superior solution. Thus, let's kill the
--with-pic idea, too. It won't get us over main.o
compiled-without-libtool and neither one of -fpic or -fpie in
CFLAGS anyway. And I can't see why it should be more useful to
have two P
* Ralf Wildenhues wrote on Tue, Nov 29, 2005 at 07:57:00PM CET:
>
> My tests with gcc-3.4.4 show that -fpie/-fPIE always override
> -fpic/-fPIC, independent of the order in which they were passed.
> (What an unfortunate choice, by the way. Oh well.)
This is http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.c
11 matches
Mail list logo
