Hi, Stefan Reinauer, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 23:36:44 +0100, a écrit : > * Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [061108 23:14]: > > Thomas Schwinge, le Wed 08 Nov 2006 22:40:54 +0100, a écrit : > > > then cat gnumach-undef-bad; exit 2; else true; fi > > > stack_chk_fail > > > > > > Is it feasible to have the `-fstack-protector' functionality in GNU Mach > > > and GRUB2 (and how to do that, then) or shall we unconditionally pass > > > `-fno-stack-protector' if available? > > > > I'd say it shouldn't be very hard to provide a stack_chk_fail function, > > even if all it does is just panic(). > > wont this add unnecessary bloat to the binary?
Just like to any binary of a distribution that would enable -fstack-protector by default. That's not our concern, that's the distribution's. Samuel _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
