From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4678 invoked by alias); 13 Dec 2001 17:49:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 4637 invoked from network); 13 Dec 2001 17:49:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dublin.ACT-Europe.FR) (212.157.227.154) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 13 Dec 2001 17:49:33 -0000 Received: by dublin.ACT-Europe.FR (Postfix, from userid 525) id 7359A22A0BF; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:50:01 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:57:00 -0000 From: Arnaud Charlet To: Richard Henderson , Arnaud Charlet , gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Use of -fPIC on Tru64 Message-ID: <20011213185001.B15020@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> References: <20011213102908.B10630@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <20011213014003.C1122@redhat.com> <20011213104446.A14306@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <20011213092349.A6807@redhat.com> <20011213182709.A13481@dublin.int.act-europe.fr> <20011213093916.C6807@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <20011213093916.C6807@redhat.com>; from rth@redhat.com on Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 09:39:16AM -0800 X-SW-Source: 2001-12/txt/msg00704.txt.bz2 > Really I don't think it matters one way or another. I'd rather > treat Tru64 just like every other platform and use -fPIC. Well, not all platforms require -fPIC, so I don't find this argument very convincing ;-) It seems cleaner to me to avoid using -fPIC when it is not needed. Arno