1 |
Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl@×××××××××××.at> posted |
2 |
45374B67.6010901@×××××××××××.at, excerpted below, on Thu, 19 Oct 2006 |
3 |
11:54:47 +0200: |
4 |
|
5 |
> Duncan wrote: |
6 |
>> So... anytime I see this error, the first thing I try is flipping some |
7 |
>> CFLAGS on and off, and see if there's a reasonable combination that |
8 |
>> works. |
9 |
>> Only if that fails do I try -fPIC and bug it as necessary. |
10 |
>> |
11 |
> But wouldn't that apply only to errors that occur during the configuration |
12 |
> step? Or have you observed a situation where a compilation change |
13 |
> triggered by a failing non-essential test caused an error later? |
14 |
|
15 |
Yes. Case in point is the very -fPIC we are discussing. If the configure |
16 |
tests -fPIC and due to a warning decides it can't be used, it doesn't |
17 |
simply abort, but continues the process thru the rest of the config and |
18 |
into the compile and linking. Only later in the linking, and gets an error |
19 |
similar to that of this thread because shared objects require -fPIC on |
20 |
this platform, does it realize things went wrong. Then the error it spits |
21 |
out says to compile with -fPIC, when that's what it would have been doing |
22 |
if the config hadn't misinterpreted an unrelated warning on the -fPIC test |
23 |
as an indication that it shouldn't be used. |
24 |
|
25 |
(The other half of your post addressed in the other subthread.) |
26 |
|
27 |
-- |
28 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
29 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
30 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |