On one hand, yes. Based on my last patch, I didn't think you would like this patch, for precisely these reasons. On the other hand, I am not sure what makes the extant NOPIC and NOLIBSTATIC better than NOLIBSHARED in these regards. Therefore, I thought I would submit this patch anyways.

John

On Sat, Jun 29, 2024, at 6:27 PM, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> Why does OpenBSD need this?
> 
> OpenBSD does not need this.  The mechanims you are finding exist because
> we (OpenBSD) need them in the base, already, for various reasons.
> 
> But you have not explained why we need more.
> 
> If this is just for you -- answer is going to be no.
> 
> You want to build a static only OpenBSD?  And then what?  You'll run
> that?  And sometime in the future you'll hit some bugs, which may or may
> not be caused by your local OpenBSD-but-actually-not-OpenBSD-at-all, and
> you'll submit vague bug reports and send people on wild goose chases?
> I've been around the block more than a few times, and the result is that
> I despise unused flexibility.
> 
>