From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] bzip2: Rearrange build order
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 17:22:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130605172207.7251ce79@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8738swej95.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
Dear Peter Korsgaard,
On Wed, 05 Jun 2013 16:15:34 +0200, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
> Thomas> Are you sure there are not already many packages that build
> Thomas> things only once with -fPIC and use that for both the static
> Thomas> and the shared library?
>
> Thomas> What you're proposing here is quite the opposite to what you
> Thomas> merged (from me) in a33baa1ef9dadbec8e45d411c30d636fa6b8872a
> Thomas> (icu: don't build object files twice).
>
> I've never claimed I was consistent ;) What I'm saying is simply that
> the "correct" way to do this, is to build the object files twice similar
> to how E.G. libtool does it.
>
> For something as small (and possibly performance sensitive) as bzip2 I
> think it is worthwhile doing it.
I'm not sure I agree with your idea of making a different decision
depending on the package. Either we decide that all static libraries
should not be built with -fPIC, and we apply this rule on all packages,
or we decide that all static libraries are built with -fPIC, so that we
actually build object files only once.
In fact, I hadn't realized that libtool was building each and every .c
file twice, once without -fPIC for the static library, and once with
-fPIC for the shared library.
I believe we have three choices:
(1) When !BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB, pass --enable-shared --disable-static
instead of the current --enable-shared --enable-static. When I did
009d8fceab4db7815502e4b0565fe0ef531d512c, I wasn't aware that
having --enable-static was causing a double build of source files.
Had I realized that, I would have probably suggested a different
solution. If someone builds with !BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB, it's
pretty unlikely that the static version of the libraries will be
needed. There might be a few exceptions, but they can be handled
by the user by adding --enable-static to the CONF_OPT of the
specific packages he is interested in.
(2) When !BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB, find a way of telling libtool not to
build object files twice, and generate static libraries using the
-fPIC capable object files. It's slightly less efficient, but if
you're building !BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB, you're using shared
libraries for most of your applications anyway, so having a small
hit with the few static libraries isn't going to be really
noticeable.
(3) When !BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB, keep --enable-shared and
--enable-static as we have today, and make sure that object files
are always built twice, once without -fPIC, and once with. I
believe this is making the build time longer, for situations
(usage of static libraries when !BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB) that are
fairly uncommon.
In any case, the solution of "some packages have their static library
objects built without -fPIC, some other packages have their static
library objects built with -fPIC" is not really nice. Where's the
boundary between the first and second category of packages?
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-05 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-05 12:56 [Buildroot] [PATCH] bzip2: Rearrange build order Markos Chandras
2013-06-05 13:08 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-06-05 13:50 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-06-05 14:02 ` Markos Chandras
2013-06-05 14:04 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-06-05 14:08 ` Markos Chandras
2013-06-05 14:15 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-06-05 14:25 ` Markos Chandras
2013-06-05 14:48 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-06-05 15:01 ` Markos Chandras
2013-06-05 15:22 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2013-06-05 21:56 ` Peter Korsgaard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130605172207.7251ce79@skate \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox