Re: shared libraries policy
Marco d'Itri wrote:
> I think that policy needs two small corrections to reflect current
> practices wrt shared libraries and PIC code:
> - what is PIC library needs to be correctly defined: compiling with
> -fPIC is not enough to have PIC code, the object MUST NOT have a
> TEXTREL section either [any other symbols need to be checked? What
> about non-i386 architectures?]
I second this. This is checked correctly by lintian BTW.
> - libraries can contain short sections of non-PIC code on architectures
> which allow this [i386 is OK, any other?] if this allows a
> significant speed increase.
This should be expended to cover the case of assembly files/ __asm__
directives that are provided for some architectures and are not
PIC aware, on architectures which allow this. The rationale being that
-fPIC will not make suddently the asm code PIC aware. But maybe
it is the situation that was supposed to be covered by this section after all
Architectures allowing this are at least i386, sparc, s390. This was allowed
on alpha some time ago, but I am not sure as of today.