Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - [SM-Discuss] x86_64 PIC CFLAGS

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Sukneet Basuta <sukneet AT gmail.com>
  • To: SM-Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [SM-Discuss] x86_64 PIC CFLAGS
  • Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 21:36:08 -0400

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Thomas Orgis <thomas-forum AT orgis.org> wrote:
> Am Sat, 26 May 2012 12:44:00 -0400
> schrieb Sukneet Basuta <sukneet AT gmail.com>:
>
>> Why do we force -fPIC -DPIC anyway?
>
> Good question. Ideally, library builds would take care of that themselves
> ... and yes, it is still strictly unnecessary and actually an overhead for
> everything else.
>
> If dropping that default, we would need to fix up some library builds, but
> it might be a good idea to get that upstream, respectively. But then, as
> upstream for my personal projects that don't necessarily assume gcc usage,
> it would be uncool to force gcc-specific flags into build systems. There
> are other compilers and they don't agree on the PIC trigger.

AFAIK, most other distros have already been doing that. So far, there
is only a handful of spells that I have run into that have an issue
with missing PIC flags. I have already committed updates to the spells
that i had issues with. I obviously haven't tested every spell though.

> Just enforcing it globally is the easiest solution for us ... question is
> if we care about the small but existing (I don't have numbers) performance
> penalty for doing so for binaries that are not part of shared libs.

What's the general consensus on this? native-x86_64-64 is currently
the only x86_64 archspec that does not have -fPIC -DPIC specified.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page