Re: eggdrop .so plugins
On Wed, 25 Oct 2000, Samuel Hocevar wrote:
> > The latter, I think. Since they aren't really shared libraries you can
> > ignore the other Lintian errors, but this one is different.
> Does anyone remember what the rationale is for having to use -fPIC
> for plugins ? It's not explained in the Policy, so I suppose it's for
> performance issues (not having to do symbol resolution at each call if I
> understand the issue well).
No, plugins are, as libraries, loaded to arbitrary locations in memory,
and thus they need to be position-independent.
> But sometimes this is just not possible at all (-fPIC eats a whole
> register and some assembly routines may use all of them), and there are
> situations where not using -fPIC is a performance loss.
If the assembly code is not position-independent, you already have a
problem here. If it is, then gcc is expected to regenerate the PIC
register after the assembly section.
Simon
--
GPG public key available from http://phobos.fs.tum.de/pgp/Simon.Richter.asc
Fingerprint: A319 A60F 20F6 C8A4 3C86 54B4 99CD AC6E 79D1 B1E7
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread!
Reply to: