From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <fweimer@redhat.com>
Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EEB83858412
	for <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 10:11:08 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 2EEB83858412
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
	s=mimecast20190719; t=1666606267;
	h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
	 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
	 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
	bh=PXIqWxJwnFCCMxYNrxfW4QU2MMXgyxD2iPZIKygOQZU=;
	b=Li38X7mRoZw7y4nBu4YNubrLF/2lgjcmIXBuCbBXl+Curjew4W2UOv5xNlFcGV8njdnQgb
	O937TFDGQbfErH4qGwmcGqVoVZARYlwu9PJffKOW2dlrxhKt8JbqSABLISoFW8ZHgdEmPl
	6CLyeA5xzQqVZcryGzERGKyH5MIdZCE=
Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com
 [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS
 (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id
 us-mta-333-RKotOMDWMJC78y-UfvNlHQ-1; Mon, 24 Oct 2022 06:11:06 -0400
X-MC-Unique: RKotOMDWMJC78y-UfvNlHQ-1
Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC74387B2A1;
	Mon, 24 Oct 2022 10:11:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.2.16.74])
	by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F459492B0A;
	Mon, 24 Oct 2022 10:11:04 +0000 (UTC)
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Samuel Thibault <sthibault@debian.org>
Cc: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@xry111.site>,  libc-alpha@sourceware.org,
  glibc@packages.debian.org
Subject: Re: static pie: confusion between _DYNAMIC, crt1.o, Scrt1.o
References: <20221022140614.rnfd4d4nefjmizzi@begin>
	<6ba3b8ba096fadec66822e2e1f712777b524f66c.camel@xry111.site>
	<20221022144548.u5rq3ffgietk4zft@begin>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 12:11:03 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20221022144548.u5rq3ffgietk4zft@begin> (Samuel Thibault's
	message of "Sat, 22 Oct 2022 16:45:48 +0200")
Message-ID: <87fsfd5y6g.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.10
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>

* Samuel Thibault:

> Is it not possible to make -static -pie get the same behavior? That'd be
> way more orthogonal for people to understand.

I think you want -static to mean -static-pie if GCC defaults to PIE,
right?

That will break a few things that use gcc -static to build binaries for
quasi-bare-metal targets using the GNU ELF toolchain (where glibc's
startup code is not use).  Overall it might still be the better
trade-off.

Thanks,
Florian