From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.54) id 1EzrGo-0006Jk-8B for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:05:18 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k0K84Wuq006361; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:04:32 GMT Received: from mail-relay-2.tiscali.it (mail-relay-2.tiscali.it [213.205.33.42]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k0K824Rs003184 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 08:02:04 GMT Received: from c1358217.kevquinn.com (84.222.87.115) by mail-relay-2.tiscali.it (7.2.069.1) id 4382FB7B007207CE for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:02:04 +0100 Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:09:20 +0100 From: "Kevin F. Quinn (Gentoo)" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] fix binary debug support, part elevenity billion 1/2 Message-ID: <20060120090920.4bdba62c@c1358217.kevquinn.com> In-Reply-To: <200601191928.53079.vapier@gentoo.org> References: <200601150111.54995.vapier@gentoo.org> <1137713582.21260.363.camel@onyx> <20060119235222.GA5564@aerie.halcy0n.com> <200601191928.53079.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.0.0-rc3 (GTK+ 2.8.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_iy+7.l/cW5D961kxzRbnS1h"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 32bf13f9-fe84-444d-9776-04f747d441b6 X-Archives-Hash: 8bedf9ab7a3c88991ed43e966149132f --Sig_iy+7.l/cW5D961kxzRbnS1h Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 19:28:53 -0500 Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Thursday 19 January 2006 18:52, Mark Loeser wrote: > > Please lets avoid this assumption. I'd love to make it so we never > > make this assumption anywhere in the tree so that we could actually > > build GCC without pie or ssp, instead of generating all of the GCC > > profiles for every user. SPLIT_SPECS=3D"no" in make.conf causes just the profile default to be built - is that good enough? > pie is in upstream gcc so your argument here is INVALID and -fno-stack-protector is only a problem if gcc-4.0 is built without the ssp-stubs - from 4.1 onwards that'll be upstream as well. Having said that, I don't think we need -fno-stack-protector in default DEBUG_FLAGS anyway, as it doesn't inhibit debug (unlike -Wl,pie). --=20 Kevin F. Quinn --Sig_iy+7.l/cW5D961kxzRbnS1h Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFD0Jqw9G2S8dekcG0RAl8qAJ9dBYcyOHClKrd/SAULMKjcCIPPbgCgytKg xd9V7Pf6P1lRU1vTzbZg2lc= =PG9o -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_iy+7.l/cW5D961kxzRbnS1h-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list