From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: [PATCH] Introduce Git.pm (v3) Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:39:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20060623123904.GL21864@pasky.or.cz> References: <7v1wtghga6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060623011205.GJ21864@pasky.or.cz> <7vejxgckq9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060622220201.19132.67536.stgit@machine.or.cz> <7vlkrohj9p.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060622235017.GH21864@pasky.or.cz> <7v1wtghga6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20060623011205.GJ21864@pasky.or.cz> <7vejxgckq9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 23 14:39:20 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FtkwJ-00015N-0j for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 23 Jun 2006 14:39:11 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750731AbWFWMjI (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:39:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751278AbWFWMjI (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:39:08 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:52706 "EHLO machine.or.cz") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750731AbWFWMjH (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:39:07 -0400 Received: (qmail 24418 invoked by uid 2001); 23 Jun 2006 14:39:04 +0200 To: Junio C Hamano , "Eric W. Biederman" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vejxgckq9.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-message-flag: Outlook : A program to spread viri, but it can do mail too. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Dear diary, on Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 10:57:50AM CEST, I got a letter where Junio C Hamano said that... > Petr Baudis writes: > > > Also, is there any real problem with just using -fPIC? > > Personally, not really, but I consider it a workaround having to > compile with -fPIC (being able to compile with -fPIC is a > feature). Well, for the .xs you do need an .so and for that you apparently need -fPIC on most architectures, so there's no way around it. There's a patch to build libgit.so, would you take it as an excuse to always compile with -fPIC? ;-) > Doesn't it have performance implications to use -fPIC when you > do not have to? No idea here. > By the way, you also need to adjust the testsuite so that it > finds the Perl modules from freshly built tree before > installing. I think (but haven't checked yet) the stuff written > in Python does that already, so you might want to mimic it. It should be enough to -I../perl/blib/lib -I../perl/blib/arch/auto/Git. Dear diary, on Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 02:04:17PM CEST, I got a letter where "Eric W. Biederman" said that... > The question is why are we building with a .so? To make use of it in Git.pm - it can call libgit routines directly from inside of Perl, but for that it needs to dynamically link libgit to the Perl process on the fly (using dlopen()). We _can_ avoid the .so, but that involved producing a new perl executable with libgit statically linked to it, which is quite impractical, so to say. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ A person is just about as big as the things that make them angry.