From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 7 19:58:50 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75AD716A420 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 19:58:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com) Received: from web32714.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web32714.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.206.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A665943D60 for ; Tue, 7 Mar 2006 19:58:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com) Received: (qmail 70341 invoked by uid 60001); 7 Mar 2006 19:58:49 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Q1aYU0tQRz8DbJ9Xc7G6hDx8z1GVzezAqRES+oC8kWlOLEbSzraeitlXC7P6LN31lTcrBEevW2992xthUhC0OffYuXtK99dou7FDNgiwCu/yYg28lhelt4gf0xhsJMk/uN/Du8mOlsMyVUCL38zjKij/XUO+4BZSrPh6vit2rlg= ; Message-ID: <20060307195849.70339.qmail@web32714.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Received: from [200.118.66.85] by web32714.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 07 Mar 2006 20:58:49 CET Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 20:58:49 +0100 (CET) From: To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20060307192606.GA56153@xor.obsecurity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: amd64 and -fPIC X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 19:58:50 -0000 --- Kris Kennaway ha scritto: > On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 08:07:12PM +0100, pfgshield-freebsd@yahoo.com wrote: > > > > --- Kris Kennaway 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 ___________________________________ Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB http://mail.yahoo.it