Isn't it shameful that this is required?
> This disables PROT_EXEC mappings in libffi (and thus python).
> I'm running with it in a bulk build with the "mandatory W^X"
> printfs that are going into snapshots and haven't triggered
> them yet, building python itself (done 2.7 and 3.4 so far)
> or in the ~200 py-* and py3-* things that have built already
> (I would have had a whole stack by now otherwise).
>
> There are a lot of test failures when this diff is used.
> Can anyone figure out if they're anything to worry about?
>
>
>
> Index: Makefile
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/ports/devel/libffi/Makefile,v
> retrieving revision 1.34
> diff -u -p -r1.34 Makefile
> --- Makefile 23 Mar 2016 22:50:29 -0000 1.34
> +++ Makefile 21 May 2016 22:28:51 -0000
> @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
> COMMENT= Foreign Function Interface
>
> DISTNAME= libffi-3.2.1
> -REVISION= 1
> +REVISION= 2
> SHARED_LIBS += ffi 1.2 # .6.4
> CATEGORIES= devel
>
> Index: patches/patch-src_closures_c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: patches/patch-src_closures_c
> diff -N patches/patch-src_closures_c
> --- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
> +++ patches/patch-src_closures_c 21 May 2016 22:28:51 -0000
> @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
> +$OpenBSD$
> +--- src/closures.c.orig Sat Nov 8 05:47:24 2014
> ++++ src/closures.c Sat May 21 15:57:22 2016
> +@@ -172,41 +172,6 @@ selinux_enabled_check (void)
> +
> + #endif /* !FFI_MMAP_EXEC_SELINUX */
> +
> +-/* On PaX enable kernels that have MPROTECT enable we can't use PROT_EXEC.
> */
> +-#ifdef FFI_MMAP_EXEC_EMUTRAMP_PAX
> +-#include <stdlib.h>
> +-
> +-static int emutramp_enabled = -1;
> +-
> +-static int
