Re: Why kdelibs4-dev and XFree86 4.3.0 don't play nice together (was: Re: xlibs-pic)
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 12:51:34AM +0100, John Gay wrote:
>
> >> This was my understanding as well. As I understand the situation, -fPIC
> is
> >> preferable to the non-PIC code which was there before.
> >
> >It's not quite that simple. This is about static libraries, which policy
> >requires to be built without -fPIC. The problem arises when linking them
> >into shared objects, for which there's xlibs-pic, like other -pic
> >packages.
> >
> Ah! I see, Ted. (Do you really, Dougal? Uhm, No, not really.)
>
> Can you tell that I only know about PIC from a course in O/S's? I'd be
> really interested in a proper explaination for this.
>
> I know that PIC code is 'supposed' to be better in that it can be loaded
> into memory without regard to the actual location or layout. Why should
> static libraries be built without -fPIC, and who's policy is it anyway?
Because if you do PIC, you use up one register. on i386 this mean that
you only have 7 (6 ?) registers left, which is a problem for this
already register starven architecture.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: