From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Adam Jackson <ajax@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] intel_drv.so fails to load
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 11:10:47 -0400
Message-ID: <500974F7.5080702@redhat.com>
References: <5005C642.6030102@t-online.de> <1342556238_9775@CP5-2952>
	<1342557713_9832@CP5-2952> <5005D10E.4080101@t-online.de>
	<1342559830_9900@CP5-2952> <1342620128.3590.13.camel@atropine>
	<1342620454_12433@CP5-2952> <1342621766.3590.29.camel@atropine>
	<50094923.3070609@t-online.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28])
	by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7E0E9E801
	for <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>;
	Fri, 20 Jul 2012 08:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <50094923.3070609@t-online.de>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/options/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/intel-gfx>
List-Post: <mailto:intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Help: <mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx>,
	<mailto:intel-gfx-request@lists.freedesktop.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
Errors-To: intel-gfx-bounces+gcfxdi-intel-gfx=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org
To: Knut Petersen <Knut_Petersen@t-online.de>
Cc: intel-gfx <intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>
List-Id: intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org

On 7/20/12 8:03 AM, Knut Petersen wrote:
> Am 18.07.2012 16:29, schrieb Adam Jackson:
>> So this really honestly is a toolchain problem, not a driver problem.
>
> Neither icecream nor gcc are broken.
>
> The solution is pretty simple:
>
> ====================================
> Never ever include -v or --verbose in CFLAGS
> ====================================
>
> Why?
>
> Because otherwise there will be some output to
> stdout during the -fPIC test compile executed from
> configure, and that output causes the build system
> to erroneously assume that -fPIC does not work.
>
> Hence xorg parts that normally would be build with
> -fPIC will be built without that flag.

autoconf bug!  Nice find.

> I think the test for "-fPIC" support is fundamentally
> broken and should be fixed. Or would it be better
> to check for -v and --verbose in CFLAGS?

It sounds like the test is broken, yeah.  Although I wonder how many 
other standard autoconf tests have this property.

- ajax