Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 23:30:41 +0400 From: "Andrew Pantyukhin" <infofarmer@gmail.com> To: "Hajimu UMEMOTO" <ume@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-ports@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/cyrus-sasl2 Makefile Message-ID: <cb5206420706131230g2864a49fl3cacc9cf879ec6d8@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <cb5206420706131134ue6a5130le000cea5fde44506@mail.gmail.com> References: <200706131105.l5DB5lhw037795@repoman.freebsd.org> <yge8xann7w8.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <cb5206420706130928i3edd10c5wc69707657cfb021c@mail.gmail.com> <yge7iq7n4nq.wl%ume@mahoroba.org> <cb5206420706131134ue6a5130le000cea5fde44506@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 6/13/07, Andrew Pantyukhin <infofarmer@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 6/13/07, Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Still, I cannot understand why this issue was not raised in the past, > > and why amd64 suddenly became to require -fPIC. > > Yeah, pointyhat didn't really show any problems. > It's probably some autotools (configure) quirk. > BTW, setting CFLAGS=-fPIC causes a strange error. On 6/13/07, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> wrote: > Perhaps because it's an incorrect change? Yeah, this doesn't look nice. This morning I tested it twice (with recursive clean in between) and both times it failed suggesting -fPIC. Now I comment out my fix and it compiles ok. Hajimi, should I back this out and wait until we get more reports? Or should we leave it as some safety net?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cb5206420706131230g2864a49fl3cacc9cf879ec6d8>