From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Mar 18 21:23:56 2004
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 40A1C16A4CE; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 21:23:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from debussy.private.org (25.60.138.210.bn.2iij.net [210.138.60.25])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id DD89B43D1F; Thu, 18 Mar 2004 21:23:55 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from chat95@mac.com)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by debussy.private.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2J5Tw9r005139;
	Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:29:58 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from chat95@mac.com)
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 14:29:58 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20040319.142958.783378669.chat95@mac.com>
To: kris@obsecurity.org, maho@FreeBSD.org,
	ports-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
From: Nakata Maho <chat95@mac.com>
In-Reply-To: <20040317171904.GC93838@dragon.nuxi.com>
References: <200403171047.i2HAlUsL048731@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20040317111525.GA62305@xor.obsecurity.org>
	<20040317171904.GC93838@dragon.nuxi.com>
Organization: private
X-Mailer: Mew version 3.3 on XEmacs 21.4.14 (Reasonable Discussion)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: -fPIC or -fpic?
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 05:23:56 -0000

Dear all,

obrien give me detailed explanation the difference
-fpic and -fPIC (thanks!),
however, as kris told me, we must test which is better.
currently, it seems only for sparc64 -fPIC make sence,
so, in /usr/share/mk/bsd.lib.mk, we find,

.if !defined(PICFLAG)
.if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "sparc64"
PICFLAG=-fPIC
.else
PICFLAG=-fpic
.endif
.endif

this is a good choice.

However, in the framework of ports, there's no way to do this since:
% grep fPIC /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.*
%
% grep fpic /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.*
%

so I have to hardcode this, and I don't like to this.
(see in math/atlas, math/atlas-devel, and biology/pymol)

Otherwise, this patch (for example, math/atlas)

@@ -49,13 +49,7 @@
        @(cd ${WRKSRC}; ${PATCH} < ${FILESDIR}/alpha-patch)
 .endif
 
-.if !defined(PICFLAG)
-.if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "sparc64"
-PICFLAG=-fPIC
-.else
-PICFLAG=-fpic
-.endif
-.endif
+.include <bsd.lib.mk>


doesn't help me
% make
Warning: Object directory not changed from original /home/maho/work/ports/math/atlas

Note:
at least amd64, in some cases, we need -fpic or -fPIC when we make
shared libraries. some programs don't set such flag when compiling as you know.
in i386, we don't need -fpic to make shared lib, so we force to make
shared lib from static ones, so this can be a big problem.
at least in the ports, we need PICFLAG definiton.

putting this in bsd.port.mk
.if !defined(PICFLAG)
.if ${MACHINE_ARCH} == "sparc64"
PICFLAG=-fPIC
.else
PICFLAG=-fpic
.endif
.endif

is not a good idea at all, since it doesn't sync with bsd.lib.mk.
splitting bsd.lib.mk to bsd.lib.pic.mk that contains only this,
then include at bsd.port.mk might be a better idea, but still dirty.

How do I do?
--nakata maho