pro64-support
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: auto-pic or non-auto-pic

To: "'Jack Carter'" <jcarter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Chan, Sun C" <sun.c.chan@xxxxxxxxx>, "'Kratzer, Willi'" <Willi.Kratzer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'pro64-support@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <pro64-support@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: auto-pic or non-auto-pic
From: "Chan, Sun C" <sun.c.chan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 09:51:56 -0800
Sender: owner-pro64-support@xxxxxxxxxxx
Jack,
the world is not just SGI anymore. I believe most compilers defaults
to non-shared/static.
Sun

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jack Carter [mailto:jcarter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 9:50 AM
> To: Chan, Sun C; 'Kratzer, Willi'; 'pro64-support@xxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject: Re: auto-pic or non-auto-pic
> 
> 
> I thought the golden age of ia64 ELF ABI was to have only
> PIC? The non-shared options were there only to get things
> moving until dso's came on the scene.
> 
> We have dso support now so why are we still allowing non-shared
> objects? If the first assumption I stated is correct then the
> longer we tolerate the non-shared objects to proliferate then
> the messier things will get in the future because archives
> tend to linger around forever.
> 
> Jack
> 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>