On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Rainer Orth
<r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote:
> "H.J. Lu" <hjl.to...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> The new proc is bogus, unfortunately: there's already an existing
>>> check_effective_target_pie that checks if a target can support PIE. The
>>> new one just overrides the previous one. On targets supporting PIE
>>> (like Darwin), but not defaulting to it, the PIE tests suddenly turn out
>>> UNSUPPORTED.
>>>
>>> You should rename the new one to
>>> e.g. check_effective_target_pie_default, update the single user, and
>>> document it in sourcebuild.texi.
>>
>> I checked in this as an obvious fix.
>
> I think pie_enabled is not a very descriptive name:
>
> Index: doc/sourcebuild.texi
> ===================================================================
> --- doc/sourcebuild.texi (revision 220617)
> +++ doc/sourcebuild.texi (working copy)
> @@ -1884,6 +1884,9 @@
> @item nonpic
> Target does not generate PIC by default.
>
> +@item pie_enabled
> +Target generates PIE by default.
> +
> @item pcc_bitfield_type_matters
> Target defines @code{PCC_BITFIELD_TYPE_MATTERS}.
>
> With -fpie, PIE is also enabled, just not the default without any
I was testing
# make RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board='unix{-m32\ -fpie,-fpie}'
I don't consider PIE is default. It is just enabled.
> options. Please either go with the pie_default I sugested or wait for
> others to weigh in before rushing in another `obvious' fix.
>
--
H.J.
