Re: PIE + bindnow for Stretch?(Re: Time to reevaluate the cost of -fPIC?)

2016-05-17 Thread Guillem Jover
On Tue, 2016-05-17 at 12:08:09 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > I'm not a fan myself for turning on hardening flags in the compiler itself, > but if you do that, then dpkg issues like https://bugs.debian.org/823869 > need to be addressed (whether all obscure build systems picking these up, or > not).

Re: PIE + bindnow for Stretch?(Re: Time to reevaluate the cost of -fPIC?)

2016-05-17 Thread Guillem Jover
Hi! On Sun, 2016-05-15 at 21:45:55 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote: > 2016-05-15 20:49 GMT+02:00 Niels Thykier : > > Bálint Réczey: > >> I think making PIE and bindnow default in dpkg (at least for amd64) would > >> be > >> perfect release goals for Stretch. > > > > I support the end goal, but I suspe

Re: PIE + bindnow for Stretch?(Re: Time to reevaluate the cost of -fPIC?)

2016-05-17 Thread Matthias Klose
On 15.05.2016 23:10, Iustin Pop wrote: On 2016-05-15 21:45:55, Bálint Réczey wrote: Hi Niels, 2016-05-15 20:49 GMT+02:00 Niels Thykier : Bálint Réczey: Hi, [...] Hi, I think making PIE and bindnow default in dpkg (at least for amd64) would be perfect release goals for Stretch. I supp

Re: PIE + bindnow for Stretch?(Re: Time to reevaluate the cost of -fPIC?)

2016-05-17 Thread Bastien Roucaries
Le 15 mai 2016 20:49:38 GMT+02:00, Niels Thykier a écrit : >Bálint Réczey: >> Hi, >> >> [...] >> > >Hi, > >> I think making PIE and bindnow default in dpkg (at least for amd64) >would be >> perfect release goals for Stretch. >> > >I support the end goal, but I suspect we should enable PIE by