Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 15:17:35 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Joseph Fenton <jlfenton@citlink.net> Cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CFLAGS+= -fPIC per default? Message-ID: <20040222231735.GA79618@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <40393010.4090402@citlink.net> References: <20040222185212.EB6BE16A4D1@hub.freebsd.org> <40391EC6.7010808@citlink.net> <20040222220210.GA54064@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> <40393010.4090402@citlink.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 03:41:20PM -0700, Joseph Fenton wrote: > Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > >On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 02:27:34PM -0700, Joseph Fenton wrote: > > > > > >>Sorry to be anal, but PC-relative addressing is by definition > >>position-independent code. > >> > >> > > > >False. > > > >The fundamental property of PIC , besides the fact that it's a > >complete misnomer, is that there are no relocations in the code > >segment. > > > You just proved my statement true. PC-relative code contains no > relocation for within a code section. How do you think that conditional > branches work? They do PC-relative jumps inside the code section. You fail to see the point. PC relative relocations are not guaranteed to be without relocation and hence are not by definition PIC. -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040222231735.GA79618>