On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:18 AM, Cory Fields <li...@coryfields.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 2:14 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 11:07 AM, Cory Fields <li...@coryfields.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 1:35 PM, H.J. Lu <hjl.to...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 10:26 AM, Cory Fields <li...@coryfields.com> wrote: >>>>> Hi list >>>>> >>>>> I'm playing with -static-pie and musl, which seems to be in good shape >>>>> for 8.0.0. Nice work :) >>>>> >>>>> However, the fact that "gcc -static -pie" and "gcc -static-pie" >>>>> produce different results is very unexpected. I understand the case >>>>> for the new link-type, but merging the options when possible would be >>>>> a huge benefit to existing buildsystems that already cope with both >>>>> individually. >>>>> >>>>> My use-case: >>>>> I'd like to build with --enable-default-pie, and by adding "-static" >>>> >>>> Why not adding "-static-pie" instead of "-static"? >>>> >>>>> to my builds, produce static-pie binaries. But at the moment, that >>>>> attempts to add an interp section. >>>>> >>>>> So my question is, if no conflicting options are found, why not hoist >>>>> "-static -pie" to "-static-pie" ? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Cory >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> H.J. >>> >>> My build system, and plenty of others I'm sure, already handle -static >>> and -pie. Having that understood to mean "static-pie" would mean that >>> the combination would now just work. >>> >>> Asking a different way, if I request -static and -pie, without -nopie, >>> quietly creating non-pie binary seems like a bug. Is there a reason >>> _not_ to interpret it as -static-pie in that case? >> >> GNU_USER_TARGET_STARTFILE_SPEC is defined as >> >> #define GNU_USER_TARGET_STARTFILE_SPEC \ >> "%{shared:; \ >> pg|p|profile:%{static-pie:grcrt1.o%s;:gcrt1.o%s}; \ >> static:crt1.o%s; \ >> static-pie:rcrt1.o%s; \ >> " PIE_SPEC ":Scrt1.o%s; \ >> :crt1.o%s} \ >> crti.o%s \ >> %{static:crtbeginT.o%s; \ >> shared|static-pie|" PIE_SPEC ":crtbeginS.o%s; \ >> :crtbegin.o%s} \ >> %{fvtable-verify=none:%s; \ >> fvtable-verify=preinit:vtv_start_preinit.o%s; \ >> fvtable-verify=std:vtv_start.o%s} \ >> " CRTOFFLOADBEGIN >> >> to pick a suitable crt1.o for static PIE when -static-pie is used. >> >> If gcc.c can convert ... -static ... -pie and ... -pie ... -static ... to >> -static-pic for GNU_USER_TARGET_STARTFILE_SPEC, it >> should work. >> >> -- >> H.J. > > Great, that's how I've fixed it locally. Would you consider accepting > a patch for this?
I'd like to see it in GCC 8. Please open a GCC bug and submit your patch against it. Thanks. -- H.J.