Hello William, [...] > I have plans for working on the FORTIFY stuff after 0.9.32 release, > which is why I went ahead and set up the libc_hidden_proto/def for it. > > Would you prefer I resubmit with only the __chk_fail function set up > for now?
I have committed some preliminaries to start with fortify support, for now *_chk() and __chk_fail() functions are disabled Generally, to get this option going, the headers have to reviewed, many of them are missing the section about FORTIFY. Generic version of the *_chk() functions should be first implemented, so that support can be enabled without caring if one arch has some adapted implementation. The __chk_fail() function could go to a separate file, to be independent of the ssp option, for this block_signals(), terminate() and ssp_write() need to be made hidden instead of static (and provided if either SSP or FORTIFY are enabled). Alternatively the ssp.c could be renamed to hardened.c I am wondering if we should also have an option to compile uClibc with -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 Regards, Peter -- GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 Euro/mtl.! Jetzt mit gratis Handy-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
