On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 08:40:11PM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote: > On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Richard Henderson wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 09:01:21PM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote: > > > I meant exactly this, gcc supports -fno-stack-protector (although gcc > > > defaults to no-ssp), so -fno-stack-protector-all should be there too > > > > Why? What option would it perform? > > to have the possibility to override an earlier one, as it is done w/ many > fno* options. Why should this one not have it's counterpart.
There are three states we can be in: (0) no stack protection -fno-stack-protector (1) heuristic stack protection -fstack-protector (2) all stack protection -fstack-protector-all All of these three states have corresponding switches. You can use any of them at any time. But what does -fno-stack-protector-all mean? I claim it doesn't mean anything at all, and is useless. I claim you either wanted -fstack-protector or -fno-stack-protector. r~
