This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: PATCH: Enable PIC for mips*-*-*
- From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>
- To: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at ds2 dot pg dot gda dot pl>
- Cc: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>,Eric Christopher <echristo at cygnus dot com>,binutils at sourceware dot cygnus dot com, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:12:25 -0800
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Enable PIC for mips*-*-*
- References: <20011119085836.A5953@lucon.org> <Pine.GSO.3.96.1011119182152.22479A-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl>
On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 06:31:34PM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> > don't think we made any promise it will always work. FWIW, what is
> > difference between linking against an archive which is not compiled
> > with PIC vs. a .o file which is not compiled with PIC? It has nothing
> > to do with archive.
>
> No difference. But since it's not supported, I'd rather not put attempts
> to support it in libtool. I think a better aproach would be to either
Me either. libtool should never pretends that it knows more than ld.
> build liberty as a shared library, or build it as an archive of PIC
libliberty/pic/libliberty.a is compiled with PIC.
> objects and handle it explicitly in Makefiles for libraries depending on
> it (e.g. via LDADD).
libtool should do whatever ld does. When I do
# gcc -shared -o libfoo.so foo.o -lbar
and there is only libbar.a, no libar.so, ld won't put references to
libbar.a in libfoo.so. I don't want libtool to put any references to
libbar.a in libfoo.la either, at least not under Linux.
H.J.