amd64 and -fPIC

Tue Mar 7 19:58:50 UTC 2006

--- Kris Kennaway <kris at obsecurity.org> ha scritto: 

> On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 08:07:12PM +0100, pfgshield-freebsd at yahoo.com wrote:
> > 
> > --- Kris Kennaway <kris at obsecurity.org> ha scritto: 
> > 
> > ...
> > > > 
> > > >     That doesn't solve the problem, which is: the static library is
> > > >     almost useless, and users might actually want or need to use the
> > > >     static library.
> > > 
> > > Why do you say it's useless?  The point of a static library is for
> > > static linking, and this works fine on amd64 or any other
> > > architecture.
> > > 
> > 
> > The problem is mixing static and shared libraries: this is perfectly legal
> 
> Unjustified assertion.
> 

I need it .. that's enough justification for me ;-). OK... not everyone has the
namespace/library requirements I have (I have to use binaries that depend on
different f77/f90 libraries with the same name), but even when the performance
effect might be measurable, it's overall effect so minor I don't care.

In any case this is not something that can be solved by the ports
infrastructure or even FreeBSD: I agree the solution is NOT to build everything
relocatable by default. 

> > and
> > very often desired in most platforms except on amd64
> 
>                                                        and other modern
> architectures.
> 

An honest question: I would like to know what other modern architectures
require this, I heard (but I'm not sure) that it's a consequence of the
architecture running both 64 and 32 bit code so.. SPARC64 and ia64 need it too?

   Pedro.

___________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB 
http://mail.yahoo.it