On Wed, 10 May 2017 15:42:25 +0200 Kristian Fiskerstrand <k...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 05/10/2017 03:29 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 10. Mai 2017, 13:58:56 CEST schrieb Dirkjan Ochtman: > >> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand > >> <k...@gentoo.org> > > wrote: > >>> Sounds like a reasonable action plan. The consequences of such a > >>> change definitely seems to be sufficiently high to merit a proper > >>> migration plan which doesn't seem to have been established at > >>> this point. Whether that can be added to a later point with gcc6 > >>> (e.g by adding a new profile, or a later point release) I don't > >>> have strong opinions on, but there should be a plan and proper > >>> overview of the consequences. > >> > >> Yeah, I think I agree. From the discussions so far, I think that we > >> should definitely aim for making pie the default for everyone (on > >> arches where it makes sense), but doing it in the gcc-6 now which > >> has seen only a short period of testing so far seems a bit hasty > >> based on data from the messages that I've seen in these threads so > >> far. > > > > Actually the idea I like best so far is Jason's profile suggestion. > > > > * package.use.mask gcc[pie] in the 13.0 profiles > > > > * generate a new set of profiles 17.0 where it's package.use.forced > > * tell people they may have to rebuild world when they switch > > > > -> This would also give us some time to discuss what other changes > > we might make with the transition to the new profiles. > > > > -> Also, this means the transition is independent of gcc release > > timing. > > > > (We just need to be careful since hardened also inherits 13.0, so > > the setting must be overridden there. As far as I can see that's > > already done there though.) > > > > +1 > +1 too actually
