Re: doc: clarification of convenience archi and --preserve-dup-deps

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 06:16:29PM CEST:
> On 25 Aug 2005, at 13:47, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 01:25:17PM CEST:
> >>
> >>There is a wrinkle in the current implementation of convenience
> >>libraries, in that they contain only PIC objects.  It is, therefore,
> >>not  portable to link them into anything other than another
> >>convenience library or a  shared library. (In practice, it might work
> >>in a lot of real life environments depending on how PIC objects  
> >>behave when linked directly into static archives or applications...
> >
> >I did not know that, and in fact I suggested Tom to use this
> >formulation.  Which systems disallows linking PIC objects in static
> >archives?  (Yet another reason to create both non-PIC and PIC
> >convenience archives, if you ask me.)
> 
> You know, I'm not entirely sure -- probably something arcane like  
> Ultrix, AIX or OSF.  ISTR it was Alexandre that pointed it out  
> originally, maybe he remembers?

Argh, I see another thing now: people _do_ use the -DPIC to put actually
different code in the two objects.  This is important for low-level
assembly code: the babel project suffers from this, for example.
Chucks, should've thought of that earlier.

Thanks for checking!

Cheers,
Ralf