Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs

To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
From: Marco d'Itri <md@Linux.IT>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:25:43 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20030110152543.GA4647@wonderland.linux.it>
Mail-followup-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20030110152328.GB4665@nevyn.them.org>
References: <[🔎] 200301100228.VAA86360@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> <[🔎] 200301100306.WAA87616@bromo.msbb.uc.edu> <[🔎] 20030110114006.GE21824@cibalia.gkvk.hr> <[🔎] 20030110152328.GB4665@nevyn.them.org>

On Jan 10, Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org> wrote:

 >Actually, barring binutils bugs I thougt this was sufficient; I'd like
 >to see an example of where it isn't (other than the current PPC linker
 >bug).
When manually written (.S or inline) assembly code is linked.
See #175074 and 175077.

-- 
ciao,
Marco

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
  - From: Daniel Kobras <kobras@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de>

References:
- more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
  - From: Jack Howarth <howarth@bromo.msbb.uc.edu>
- Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
  - From: Jack Howarth <howarth@bromo.msbb.uc.edu>
- Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
  - From: Josip Rodin <joy@gkvk.hr>
- Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
  - From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>

Prev by Date: Re: AMD response about Debian x86-64 port
Next by Date: Re: Proposal: Debian release numbers
Previous by thread: Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
Next by thread: Re: more non-PIC static libs in shared libs
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread