Re: Shared libs with non-PIC code on i386

[Philippe Troin <phil@fifi.org>]

Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de> writes:

> #include <hallo.h>
> Philippe Troin wrote on Wed Aug 15, 2001 um 04:44:21PM:
> 
> > > explain my problems and what the problem is.  I have a problem with
> > > linking PIC (position independent code) with non-PIC code in a
> > > shared library. The current policy requires all libraries to contain
> >                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ <--\
> > This should read "policy requires all *shared* libraries ------/
> 
> I mean "shared", of course.
> 
> >      All libraries must have a shared version in the `lib*' package and a
> >      static version in the `lib*-dev' package.  The shared version must be
> >      compiled with `-fPIC', and the static version must not be.  In other
> >      words, each `*.c' file will need to be compiled twice.
> 
> Yes, this is the paragraph in the policy I am talking about. Reading
> this word after word, I think I wouldn't violate it enabling the DGA
> plugin since _my_ stuff is compiled with -fPIC ;)

8< snip >8

> > > without DGA on non-x86? Currently, I had to remove the complete DGA
> > > support (though it is stable enough), so this "exceptional case"
> > > would make DGA for most users possible.
> > 
> > Maybe you should lobby for a libXxf86dga.so shared library ? Policy
> > mandates that both .a and .so of all libraries should be provided.
> 
> ...there is no libXxf86dga.so. But I could bother Branden, of course ;)

You should, since xlibs/xlibs-dev violate the policy section quoted
above.

Phil.