From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 28 21:38:56 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2FF16A420; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 21:38:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CBF843D5A; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 21:38:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DDEF1A3C26; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 13:38:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9F57B53664; Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:38:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:38:53 -0500 From: Kris Kennaway To: Mikhail Teterin Message-ID: <20060228213853.GB87033@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <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> <1141159754.20664.89.camel@mteterin.us.murex.com> <20060228213131.GB86137@xor.obsecurity.org> <1141162512.20664.96.camel@mteterin.us.murex.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1141162512.20664.96.camel@mteterin.us.murex.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, gnome@FreeBSD.org, obrien@FreeBSD.org, Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: While we discuss libtool (-fpic vs. -fPIC) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 21:38:56 -0000 --24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 04:35:12PM -0500, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > ? ??, 2006-02-28 ? 16:31 -0500, Kris Kennaway ????: > > In fact I'd say none will (except those that might break by having it > > defined unexpectedly), because any port that needs to define -DPIC > > that in order to conditionally compile PIC code must already be doing > > so, or it'd be broken out of the box. >=20 > Well being 100% correct is better, than being 99.99% correct. Yes, but: > As I said, > these things aren't worth the trouble of chasing individual ports, but > making something like libtool DTRT is a good idea. >=20 > This includes both, `-fpic' and `-DPIC' flags. As I argued, spamming in -DPIC everywhere with libtool is at best a NOP and at worst may break ports that expect it to be undefined for whatever reason. The defaults are fine.. Kris --24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEBMLtWry0BWjoQKURAoJDAJ9rXwHP/QL0dzoIU/WuFmStliLBPgCgpqQC 8uL9g5IS3ufa1UGziwT+vWI= =ug23 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --24zk1gE8NUlDmwG9--