From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(dot)dunstan(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: configure fails for perl check on CentOS8 |
Date: | 2019-10-19 15:55:39 |
Message-ID: | f753f86f-f8cc-75ad-d31b-759ef98a8442@2ndQuadrant.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 10/18/19 9:50 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> The immediately problematic command generated by autoconf is:
>> ...
>> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccGxodNv.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 against symbol `PL_memory_wrap' can not be used when making a PIE object; recompile with -fPIC
>> /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output
>> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
>> Very interestingly I don't get the error when the "-O0" is "-O2". It
>> is because gcc eliminates the PL_memory_wrap maybe by inlining.
> Yeah, probably so. But I don't like the idea of fixing a problem
> triggered by user-supplied CFLAGS by injecting more cflags from
> elsewhere. That seems likely to be counterproductive, or at
> least it risks overriding what the user wanted.
>
> Can we fix this by using something other than perl_alloc() as
> the tested-for function? That is surely a pretty arbitrary
> choice. Are there any standard Perl entry points that are just
> plain functions with no weird macro expansions?
>
I had a look in perl's proto.h but didn't see any obvious candidate. I
tried a couple of others (e.g. Perl_get_context) and got the same result
reported above.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan https://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2019-10-19 16:18:51 | Re: jsonb_set() strictness considered harmful to data |
Previous Message | Stephen Frost | 2019-10-19 15:43:59 | Re: Proposal: Make use of C99 designated initialisers for nulls/values arrays |