https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28334
Eric Gallager changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
CC|
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-11 03:03 ---
Again an end user should not care what caused the bug, even if it gives more
information to the developer faster, the developer should be able to debug the
program just fine. Also using SSP is about not trusting
--- Comment #2 from nigelenki at comcast dot net 2006-07-11 03:27 ---
And the developer is going to debug a program nice and slow when those obscure,
hard to trigger bugs come along.
I was just toying with metasploit the other day. Threw an exploit at Windows
to get me a remote VNC
--- Comment #3 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-07-11 04:27 ---
(In reply to comment #2)
And the developer is going to debug a program nice and slow when those
obscure,
hard to trigger bugs come along.
An end user should not care why something crashed, it just confuses them
--- Comment #4 from solar at gentoo dot org 2006-07-11 04:28 ---
See bug #28328 comment #5 on why this should be closed as WONTFIX/INVALID or
the likes.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28334
--- Comment #5 from nigelenki at comcast dot net 2006-07-11 04:44 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
See bug #28328 comment #5 on why this should be closed as WONTFIX/INVALID or
the likes.
Eh close it WONTFIX because it's not gcc's job. Like I said, the stack smash
handler can be
