From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-64147-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF00C138247
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Thu,  9 Jan 2014 21:57:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 96E40E0D56;
	Thu,  9 Jan 2014 21:57:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4AA2E0B1F
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu,  9 Jan 2014 21:57:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.33] (142.Red-2-137-47.dynamicIP.rima-tde.net [2.137.47.142])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	(Authenticated sender: pacho)
	by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52B3233F701
	for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu,  9 Jan 2014 21:57:12 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <1389304629.424.44.camel@belkin5>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] To enable ssp default in Gcc the
 toolchain.eclass need some changes.
From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:57:09 +0100
In-Reply-To: <7554031.Sacz2dxc8i@laptop1.gw.ume.nu>
References: <7554031.Sacz2dxc8i@laptop1.gw.ume.nu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.8.5 
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Archives-Salt: 2470caea-f55b-4e47-99ba-5aad77906ce2
X-Archives-Hash: a6f8988123172d672d037f2451a40953

El jue, 09-01-2014 a las 21:58 +0100, Magnus Granberg escribió:
> Hi
> 
> Some time ago we discussed that we should enable stack smashing 
> (-fstack-protector) by default.  So we opened a bug to track this [1].  
> The affected Gcc version will be 4.8.2 and newer. Only amd64, x86, mips, ppc, 
> ppc64 and arm will be affected by this change. 
> 
> You can turn off ssp by using the nossp USE flag or by adding 
> -fno-stack-protector to the CFLAGS and/or CXXFLAGS. We are using the same 
> patch as Debian/Ubuntu but with some Gentoo fixes.
> 
> The patch will move the sed for the HARD_CFLAGS, ALLCFLAGS and 
> ALLCXXFLAGS from do_gcc_PIE_patches() to make_gcc_hard().  We will 
> make_gcc_hard() the default for all Gcc versions 4.8 and newer, and turn 
> it on or off with hardened_gcc_works() that will make some sanity checks.
> 
> /Magnus

What are the advantages of disabling SSP to deserve that "special"
handling via USE flag or easily disabling it appending the flag? 

Thanks a lot for the info :)