[racket] link errors on 64bit

From: David Griffiths (dave at fo.am)
Date: Mon Jun 3 08:53:10 EDT 2013

On 29/05/13 02:03, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> A drawback of adding `-fPIC' to the Racket build by default is that
> everyone would pay a little of performance. For example,
>    racket -c -l racket
> seems to take 5-8% longer when Racket is compiled with -fPIC. That's
> probably about the worst-case hit, though, since loading `racket' from
> source spends a lot of time in the C-implemented run-time system. An
> example that spends all its time in JIT-generated code is unaffected.
> (I also tried GC-intensive examples, but `-fPIC' doesn't seem to have
> much effect on the Racket GC.)

I see, interesting...

> Since the cost isn't so big, so I think it might be ok to add -fPIC to
> the Ubuntu PPA's build. Another option is adding it as a default flag
> for 64-bit Linux at the `configure' level, but that seems more complex.
> But how important is it in your context to use the PPA-supplied
> "libracket3m.a"? You could build your own "libracket3m.a" from the
> Racket source, suppling `CPPFLAGS=-fPIC' to `configure'.

I've been trying to avoid maintaining my own racket package, but it
sounds like that might be the best option at this stage.

It's tempting to static link libracket3m - it does break the spirit of
debian packaging, but the argument for this is a bit stronger as I'm
only using a small proportion of what racket provides.

Hmm, I will have a think...



Posted on the users mailing list.