Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Sat, 13 May 2006 23:04:10 -0700:
>> With regards to Duncan's (non-hardened) problem, adding: >> >> filter-ldflags -Wl,-z,now >> >> to x-modular.eclass as he suggests should be fine; his issue is >> different to that with the hardened compiler in as much as he has added >> the '-Wl,-z,now' to LDFLAGS as advised by the QA message and the above >> filter will just remove it again; whereas to deal with the hardened >> compiler we need to reliably add a flag to all the relevant link >> commands (the bit that takes the effort is working out which are >> relevant). > > Now I'm confused. Do you want this filter instead of the current > situation, in addition to, or what? This is exactly why I asked for a > patch. That would be http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=116698 . It didn't have a patch included at the time, but I suggested it was different, and described the appropriate patch (as described here) yet it was marked duplicate. Given the discussion, expect to see the bug reopened, with a reference to this thread, and a patch. Spyderous, IMO the two issues are separate, two different ways to arrive at the same undesired result, so could be handled together or separately. As the hardened one doesn't have a current fix, while the QA message one does, and the latter really should be addressed before stabilization, while the other is going to take awhile, it would appear separate is best. Fix the one that's possible to fix now, leave the other for later. The LDFLAGS one (116698) would then be RESOLVED, FIXED, after application of the patch, the hardened one (110506) could be RESOLVED, LATER, or RESOLVED, UPSTREAM (given that there's a fair chance it'll be fixed for 7.2), if desired, or left open, depending on what's easiest to track. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
