From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25755 invoked by alias); 7 Jun 2011 16:55:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 25745 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jun 2011 16:55:33 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Jun 2011 16:55:20 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p57GtG04026045 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 12:55:16 -0400 Received: from tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com (tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com [10.16.42.4]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p57GtFQD010199 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 12:55:15 -0400 Received: from tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p57GtEu0007141; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 18:55:14 +0200 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p57GtD2h007140; Tue, 7 Jun 2011 18:55:13 +0200 Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 16:55:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Rainer Orth Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [testsuite] Run TLS torture tests with -fpic etc. Message-ID: <20110607165513.GD17079@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20110603194403.GG17079@tyan-ft48-01.lab.bos.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2011-06/txt/msg00548.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 06:48:08PM +0200, Rainer Orth wrote: > any word on this patch? I think I only need approval for the gcc.c I'm not a maintainer of gcc.c, and I think it is a bad idea. PIE is just a (slightly) more secure form of an executable, therefore if a target doesn't support position independent executables, linking it as normal executable is IMHO just fine. Jakub