This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: gcc corrections for better pie support
- From: "Peter S. Mazinger" <ps dot m at gmx dot net>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:53:21 +0100 (CET)
- Subject: Re: gcc corrections for better pie support
On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> "Peter S. Mazinger" <ps.m@gmx.net> writes:
>
> > On Mon, 8 Nov 2004, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> >
> >> "Peter S. Mazinger" <ps.m@gmx.net> writes:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, 7 Nov 2004, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> >>
> >> I said "submit each logically distinct change separately". That means
> >> sending each patch in a separate email. Furthermore, you broke up the
> >> patch along structural lines, not logical lines. This is less
> >> convenient to review. You listed six problems with the existing code;
> >> ideally you would send six independent patches, each of which
> >> completely solves exactly one of those problems.
> >
> > I have one question that influences the results, before I reorganize my
> > patches, which archs should support the profile flag?
> >
> > Currently some archs have in their STARTFILE section
> > %{pg|p:...}
> > others
> > %{pg|p|profile:...}
>
> The intended behavior is for -profile to link against the profiled
> version of the C library (usually -lc_p) and -pg not; the two options
> are otherwise identical. -profile is a completely system-generic
> feature that should be universally supported. It would be nice if you
> made that change (IMO it qualifies as a bug fix), but please do so
> separately from your other changes.
Is than -p only a short-cut for -profile?
Peter
--
Peter S. Mazinger <ps dot m at gmx dot net> ID: 0xA5F059F2
Key fingerprint = 92A4 31E1 56BC 3D5A 2D08 BB6E C389 975E A5F0 59F2