This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Use Pcrt1.o%s/gPcrt1.o%s for -static-pie
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Rich Felker <dalias at libc dot org>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 09:39:28 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use Pcrt1.o%s/gPcrt1.o%s for -static-pie
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20171015131657.GA24340@gmail.com> <20171101163221.GA16240@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 06:16:57AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote:
>> crt1.o is used to create dynamic and non-PIE static executables. Static
>> PIE needs to link with Pcrt1.o, instead of crt1.o, to relocate static PIE
>> at run-time. When -pg is used with -static-pie, gPcrt1.o should be used.
>>
>> Tested on x86-64. OK for master?
>
> Is there a reason you didn't follow the existing naming practice here?
> Openbsd and musl libc have both had static pie for a long time now and
> have used rcrt1.o as the name.
I wasn't aware of rcrt1.o and there is no reference to rcrt1.o in GCC at all.
Does the FSF GCC support static PIE for musl libc? If not, is there a GCC
bug for it?
BTW, I don't mind replacing Pcrt1.o/gPcrt1.o with rcrt1.o/grcrt1.o.
--
H.J.