| 1 |
On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 00:15:25 -0400 |
| 2 |
Luis Francisco Araujo <araujo@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Hello World! |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I want to ask for suggestions and opinions for the best way to handle |
| 7 |
> this bug: |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158434 |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
[textrels in smalltalk shared librart libgst.so] |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> I am usually very hesitant to add new use flags to the tree (unless |
| 14 |
> they are *really* necessary or imply a great advantage.) ; though i |
| 15 |
> am not sure here if anybody else would consider this a good |
| 16 |
> recommendation for handling textrels. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
In general, we would urge maintainers to default to no-textrels for |
| 19 |
shared libraries; normally the performance impact is negligible |
| 20 |
(often the performance is better, overall). It would be worth |
| 21 |
obtaining some real statistics before deciding. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Note that textrels in shared libraries are pretty much an x86-only |
| 24 |
thing. amd64 in particular does not tolerate textrels in shared |
| 25 |
libraries (PIC is cheaper on amd64). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> I was thinking more of a simple 'use hardened && myconf=" .. "' |
| 28 |
> specific line for this ebuild; but it's probably a good idea offering |
| 29 |
> to more developers the easy choice of this feature through a USE flag? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I think 'use pic' would be more appropriate, because we're talking |
| 32 |
about whether we want position-independent code or not (but I defer to |
| 33 |
solar in these things). |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> If it looks enough useful for many people; then i think we can |
| 36 |
> proceed to implement it; if it will only be used by this ebuild; then |
| 37 |
> i am already against it ;-) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
Kevin F. Quinn |
Archives