linux-kernel - Re: [patch 5/5] Add the -fstack-protector option to the CFLAGS

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 28 Jul 2006 19:51:44 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	arjan@...ux.intel.com, ak@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...l.org
Subject: Re: [patch 5/5] Add the -fstack-protector option to the CFLAGS

On Fri, 28 Jul 2006 16:12:15 PDT, David Miller said:

> Your gcc-4.1.1 includes the -fstack-protector feature, but it might
> not have the gcc bug fix necessary to make that feature work on the
> kernel compile, which is why the version check is necessary.

Whee.  A busticated feature - how annoying.

Do you happen to know the exact PR# for that one?  Looking at the gcc RPM
changelog, there's a *lot* of backported fixes in the Fedora compiler, so it
may in fact be in there already.  I'm mentioning this mostly as a practical
"increase the number of testers" - as far as I can tell, what will ship in
Fedora Core 6 is going to call itself gcc 4.1.1, and I'm pretty sure I'm not
the only person who isn't ambitious enough to build a whole new gcc just to
test this.  So a lot of people won't be able to easily use this until FC7.

Having said that, I have *no* idea how best to code "gcc 4.2 or patched Fedora
4.1.1"...

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped