| 1 |
On Sun, 2011-02-27 at 16:33 +0000, Ed W wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I think what you are saying is that using PIC requires some special |
| 4 |
> handling (but that work seems largely done now?). However, does |
| 5 |
> removing PIC leave the AMD64 architecture "less secure" in some way? Or |
| 6 |
> is some other procedure now replacing PIC? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
You can't "remove PIC" from AMD64 -- it's required for shared library |
| 9 |
use. But it's also built in to the AMD64 ABI, unlike x86 where it was |
| 10 |
shoehorned into the existing ABI (by hijacking a register for the GOT). |
| 11 |
So the USE flag doesn't actually serve any purpose. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Even worse, some packages disable parts of their code written in |
| 14 |
assembler when USE=pic (since it fails when the extra register is taken |
| 15 |
away), but would be fine under AMD64 with tons of extra registers. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Basically, the pic USE flag is only really useful, needed, or productive |
| 18 |
on x86, so they're taking it out of the amd64 profile. |
Archives