Michal Privoznik <mpriv...@redhat.com> writes:
> On 06.02.2013 16:09, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 06/02/2013 15:49, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
>>>>> I don't think that's necessary. The 2nd level is the highest one
>>>>> [1] or [2].
>>>>> It seems like in my case it's compiler who's defining the macro:
>>>>>
>>>>> $ echo "int main() {return 0;}" | gcc -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -x c -
>>>>> <command-line>:0:0: warning: "_FORTIFY_SOURCE" redefined [enabled
>>>>> by default]
>>>>> <stdin>:1:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition
>>>>>
>>>>> in which case we must undefine it. However, if the _FORTIFY_SOURCE is
>>>>> defined by environment, I think we should not override it. So maybe need
>>>>> a different approach. Anyway, with current state I cannot
>>>>> compile. I am using
>>>>> gcc version 4.7.2 (Gentoo 4.7.2 p1.3, pie-0.5.5)
>>> It would be nice to fix this for QEMU 1.4 but my gcc FORTIFY_SOURCE foo
>>> is not strong enough to know what the best approach is here.
>>>
>>> Reviews from anyone else?
>>
>> I would prefer to avoid having _FORTIFY_SOURCE completely, and let
>> distros do it. Alternatively, tie it to a new --enable switch which
>> would do -U -D.
>>
>> But if there is a real problem for 1.4 the patch looks good.
>>
>> Paolo
>>
>
> Sorry for resurrecting such old thread, but what's the conclusion then?
Thread petered out without a conclusion?
> I keep hitting this problem and I am tired of having one single patch on
> the top of HEAD. And I bet others ran into this as well.
Few things focus discussions as well as a patch does. Suggest to post
one to get things going again.
