From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4155 invoked by alias); 26 Mar 2009 00:12:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 4147 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Mar 2009 00:12:12 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from dair.pair.com (HELO dair.pair.com) (209.68.1.49) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with SMTP; Thu, 26 Mar 2009 00:12:06 +0000 Received: (qmail 19448 invoked by uid 20157); 26 Mar 2009 00:12:03 -0000 Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Mar 2009 00:12:03 -0000 Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 00:12:00 -0000 From: Hans-Peter Nilsson To: Cary Coutant cc: Binutils Subject: Re: [gold][patch] Fix non-PIC warning to print only when building position-independent output In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20090325200743.D15751@dair.pair.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact binutils-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: binutils-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-03/txt/msg00465.txt.bz2 On Wed, 25 Mar 2009, Cary Coutant wrote: > If we ever do hit this case in a > non-position-independent link, however, I hope it'll be the compiler's > fault, and we shouldn't print a message that implies that -fPIC is > actually required. (Maybe we should print something instead about a > possible bug in the compiler or assembly code?) IMHO don't just hint at a gcc bug: missing -fPIC is much too common. Or if that's not applicable here, maybe the user didn't use the correct linker option? brgds, H-P