From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/4930 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "writeonce@midipix.org" Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: static musl-based gdb and -fPIC Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 13:03:12 -0400 Message-ID: <5353FDD0.6090903@midipix.org> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1398013458 1270 80.91.229.3 (20 Apr 2014 17:04:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 17:04:18 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-4934-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Apr 20 19:04:13 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WbvA5-0006Rp-04 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 19:04:13 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7690 invoked by uid 550); 20 Apr 2014 17:04:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 7359 invoked from network); 20 Apr 2014 17:03:22 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:4930 Archived-At: Greetings, While building a statically linked musl-based gdb, ld asked that libc.a be recompiled with -fPIC. After recompiling musl with the above flag, gdb built successfully. The reason I wanted to have a static gdb (other than the trivial ones) was to be able to debug a musl-based python. The distribution's gdb has a dynamic dependency on a glibc-based libpython, and the two friends don't play well together. Now that the static gdb is up and running, my questions are: 1) is there any reason not to "always" compile musl with -fPIC, at least on x86_64? 2) is there any reason to revert to the old build of libc.so? Although I rebuilt musl because of libc.a, it turns out that the -fPIC flag also helped libc.so become much smaller: 699299 bytes, instead of 2767910 bytes (musl v1.0.0, binutils v2.24). Any other factors to consider? Thanks for looking at this, zg