On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 15:01:28 +0200, Louis Bettens wrote: > Le 20. 07. 13 12:07, Daniel Silverstone a écrit : > >Would it not make sense at that point to simply patch ghc to always add the > >flag to the link (unless told not to) ? > Umm... I am not sure. This would mean changing the default behavior > of ghc, which is intrusive. This doesn't seem a good move to me.
I'm not saying it's necessarily a good move, just raising it as an option. > (Please contradict me) Would you do that to gcc? Debian already did mess with gcc -- remember the --as-needed debacle? (which mucks up loadable module linking massively) > But perhaps I have already gone too far with my patching dyre idea. > Let's look closer at the reasoning. the starting point is that > Debian wants to ship only relro'd executables in its packages. Now, > I point out that the executables shipped by xmonad, yi, taffybar and > so on are just stubs to boot another binary, therefore if we want to > protect these applications by default, we should care about the > other binaries. xmonad and taffybar are both default functional programs without *needing* to be recompiled. D. -- Daniel Silverstone http://www.digital-scurf.org/ PGP mail accepted and encouraged. Key Id: 3CCE BABE 206C 3B69 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
