Hi!
On Mon, 2017-02-27 at 22:45:24 +, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Guillem Jover dixit:
> >This is wrong in so many levels, as we'll have discrepancies between
> >architectures, the interface towards maintainers is inconsistent, and
> >updating the PIE support needs touching and coordi
Dixi quod…
>Thank you for this change — now I can probably remove all the
>special CFLAGS handling from my packages again…
⚠ ⚠ ⚠
Unfortunately, this is NOT enough!
If some package declares hardening=+all then dpkg will STILL
inject the -specs= stuff into various flags, breaking e.g.
gpgme1.0 (o
On 27.02.2017 23:45, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Guillem Jover dixit:
>
>>This is wrong in so many levels, as we'll have discrepancies between
>>architectures, the interface towards maintainers is inconsistent, and
>>updating the PIE support needs touching and coordinating two places. But
Guillem Jover dixit:
>This is wrong in so many levels, as we'll have discrepancies between
>architectures, the interface towards maintainers is inconsistent, and
>updating the PIE support needs touching and coordinating two places. But
Not quite: it *only* needs changing in GCC now th
4 matches
Mail list logo