Re: R_PPC_REL24 relocation in shared libraries

[Olaf Hering <olh at suse dot de>]

 On Mon, Feb 24, Geoff Keating wrote:

> Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 04:11:46PM +0100, Olaf Hering wrote:
> > > the linker does allow R_PPC_REL24 relocations in shared libraries. These
> > > relocs come from object files compiled without -fPIC. Code compiled
> > > without -fPIC is not supposed to work in shared libraries. I think that
> > > is true for every *-linux* architecture, but I'm mainly concerned about
> > > powerpc-linux.
> > 
> > Non-PIC code in shared libs is supported by binutils on some other 
> > architectures, eg x86, so it's reasonable for the gas testsuite to
> > check that non-PIC shared libs work.  Non-PIC shared libs do have some
> > disadvantages.  eg. non-PIC shared libs might have relocations in
> > read-only segments, causing pages to become unshared, and as you know,
> > on powerpc-linux you might also run into problems with branches not
> > being able to reach their targets.
> 
> Non-PIC code in shared libraries is supposed to work, most of the time
> (and certainly well enough for the binutils testsuite) on powerpc-linux.

Ok, what is correct now? Or has this change in the last years?
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-alpha/2001-06/msg00171.html

"She will not get pregnant 'most of the time'" sounds risky, to me. ;-)

Gruss Olaf

-- 
A: No.
Q: Should I include quotations after my reply?