Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 04:52:15 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: Mikhail Teterin <mi+mxe@aldan.algebra.com>, ports@freebsd.org, gnome@freebsd.org, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: While we discuss libtool (-fpic vs. -fPIC) Message-ID: <20060301095215.GC97216@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20060301103517.vwzsg3o1icswk008@netchild.homeip.net> References: <1141151381.20664.19.camel@mteterin.us.murex.com> <20060228192453.GA84695@xor.obsecurity.org> <1141155894.20664.59.camel@mteterin.us.murex.com> <20060228195014.GA85269@xor.obsecurity.org> <1141156556.20664.66.camel@mteterin.us.murex.com> <20060228201124.GA85491@xor.obsecurity.org> <1141158688.20664.82.camel@mteterin.us.murex.com> <20060228204406.GA86137@xor.obsecurity.org> <20060301103517.vwzsg3o1icswk008@netchild.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--DBIVS5p969aUjpLe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 10:35:17AM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: >=20 > >Also, Peter Wemm confirmed for me that -fpic and -fPIC are identical > >on amd64. >=20 > So why failed devel/pwlib on amd64 and why was the problem fixed by adding > -fPIC then? Because it used neither -fpic nor the identical -fPIC on its shared libraries :-) Kris --DBIVS5p969aUjpLe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEBW7OWry0BWjoQKURAu5OAKDKFQlDSJsLS9P3TCAYzSp/uz908wCg7gi5 XhRxUjOQ6e2COMhfYSGXaEM= =FxoM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --DBIVS5p969aUjpLe--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060301095215.GC97216>