From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Aug 10 12:21:09 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94D511065670
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:21:09 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from gonzo@freebsd.org)
Received: from luidgi.portaone.com (luidgi.portaone.com [195.138.219.143])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E5618FC16
	for <arch@freebsd.org>; Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:21:09 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from gonzo@freebsd.org)
Received: from mail.pbxpress.com ([65.61.203.142] helo=leaf.pbxpress.com)
	by luidgi.portaone.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP
	(TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)id 1KS9v1-000DUi-O5;
	Sun, 10 Aug 2008 05:21:07 -0700
Received: from jeeves.bluezbox.com (k3-gw.portaone.com [193.28.87.193])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by leaf.pbxpress.com (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m7ACO9g4005721
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Sun, 10 Aug 2008 05:24:15 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from gonzo@freebsd.org)
Message-ID: <489EDD2F.9080302@freebsd.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:21:03 +0300
From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko <gonzo@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080704)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
References: <20080729.161303.709402272.imp@bsdimp.com>	<86r69buar0.fsf@ds4.des.no>
	<489B08F6.8060605@freebsd.org> <867iasfmrh.fsf@ds4.des.no>
In-Reply-To: <867iasfmrh.fsf@ds4.des.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Spam-Status: No, recieved from trusted server
Cc: arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Need a code review
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2008 12:21:09 -0000

Dag-Erling Smørgrav wrote:
> Oleksandr Tymoshenko <gonzo@freebsd.org> writes:
>> openpam detects static modules build using cpp(1) condition:
>> #if defined(__GNUC__) && !defined(__PIC__) && !defined(NO_STATIC_MODULES)
>> The problem is that gcc MIPS option -mabi-calls assumes -fpic for both
>> static and dynamic builds. So the question is: would defining
>> NO_STATIC_MODULES for MIPS be enough or it should be addressed
>> upstream?
> 
> "upstream" in this case means me.
     Here is new fix: http://people.freebsd.org/~gonzo/mips2/libpam2.diff
The idea is to set define explicitly for dynamic case rather then rely on
__PIC__.

-- 
gonzo