This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: -fPIC -fPIE

From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
To: Ian Lance Taylor <iant at google dot com>
Cc: GCC Development <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 07:00:11 -0800
Subject: Re: -fPIC -fPIE
References: <CAKOQZ8x4YLa4R6hxOm4tUkCtxvRQ7bKgbrwmTW5okCPXW5bWbA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Ian Lance Taylor <iant@google.com> wrote:
> Currently -fPIC -fPIE seems to be the same as -fPIE.  Unfortunately,
> -fPIE -fPIC also seems to be the same as -fPIE.  It seems to me that,
> as is usual with conflicting options, we should use the one that
> appears last on the command line.
>
> Do we have an existing mechanism in options processing for one option
> to turn off another, where the options are not exact inverses?  I
> looked for one but I didn't see one.  There is support for that for
> options with the Mask property, but I don't see it for non-target
> options.
>

Can you handle it similar to gcoff/gstabs/gdwarf-?


-- 
H.J.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: -fPIC -fPIE
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

References:
- -fPIC -fPIE
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]