Re: [FYI] Cleanup of linux pass_all

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Sep 15, 2004, Bob Friesenhahn <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Sep 2004, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

>>> if there was only a good way to test for PIC ....

>> The only reasonable way I can think of is to get the linker to try and
>> link stuff.  If it fails, we print a warning message and proceed to
>> building a static-only version of the library.  And let's just hope
>> modern linkers won't silently create corrupt binaries.

> I expect that assumption takes a lot of finger-crossing.  Some
> problems will be found at run-time by ld.so and some will be found via
> gdb in the resulting core dump. :-)

It sure does.  But the current stance of using pass_all is exactly
such an assumption, with the difference that, if the linker actually
detects the error, libtool will drop dead instead of backtracking and
attempting to proceed with a static-only library.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   address@hidden, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  address@hidden, gnu.org}