-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 01/09/2014 06:09 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 01/09/2014 05:29 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 01/09/2014 05:21 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> Dnia 2014-01-09, o godz. 17:06:52
>>> "Anthony G. Basile" <bluen...@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
>>>
>>>> On 01/09/2014 04:57 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>>>>> What are the advantages of disabling SSP to deserve that "special"
>>>>> handling via USE flag or easily disabling it appending the flag?
>>>> There are some cases where ssp could break things.  I know of once case
>>>> right now, but its somewhat exotic.  Also, sometimes we *want* to break
>>>> things for testing.  I'm thinking here of instance where we want to
>>>> test
>>>> a pax hardened kernel to see if it catches abuses of memory which would
>>>> otherwise be caught by executables emitted from a hardened toolchain.
>>>> Take a look at the app-admin/paxtest suite.
>>> Just to be clear, are we talking about potential system-wide breakage
>>> or single, specific packages being broken by SSP? In other words, are
>>> there cases when people will really want to disable SSP completely?
>>>
>>> Unless I'm misunderstanding something, your examples sound like you
>>> just want -fno-stack-protector per-package. I don't really think you
>>> actually want to rebuild whole gcc just to do some testing on a single
>>> package...
>>>
>> Or just as easily set -fno-stack-protector in CFLAGS in make.conf.
>>
> 
> I just reread this and we'd better be clear here.  With ssp on by
> default in gcc, if you put CFLAGS="...  -fno-stack-protector" in
> make.conf you will build your *entire* system with no ssp.  You probably
> don't want this.  You'll probably only want ssp off on a per package
> basis, in which case, add a line to package.env and set the CFLAGS for
> only that package.
> 
Of course this is EXACTLY the same as building gcc[nossp] which is what
we are discussing. So afaict you and I are in total agreement on all fronts.

- -Zero
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=AtZz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to