On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:48 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:39 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:32 AM, Rich Felker <dal...@libc.org> wrote: >>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 06:16:57AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: >>>> crt1.o is used to create dynamic and non-PIE static executables. Static >>>> PIE needs to link with Pcrt1.o, instead of crt1.o, to relocate static PIE >>>> at run-time. When -pg is used with -static-pie, gPcrt1.o should be used. >>>> >>>> Tested on x86-64. OK for master? >>> >>> Is there a reason you didn't follow the existing naming practice here? >>> Openbsd and musl libc have both had static pie for a long time now and >>> have used rcrt1.o as the name. >> >> I wasn't aware of rcrt1.o and there is no reference to rcrt1.o in GCC at all. >> Does the FSF GCC support static PIE for musl libc? If not, is there a GCC >> bug for it? >> >> BTW, I don't mind replacing Pcrt1.o/gPcrt1.o with rcrt1.o/grcrt1.o. >> > > Here is the updated patch to use rcrt1.o/grcrt1.o. > > OK for trunk? > > Thanks. >
PING. -- H.J.