Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ali-Reza Anghaie <ali@×××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Cc: steveb@××××××××.com
Subject: [gentoo-dev] RE: stackguard, formatguard, etc.
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 03:42:10
Message-Id: 1014111615.3452.12.camel@damascus.packetknife.com
Well, WireX hasn't yet released a modern Stackguard compiler. Don't know
how long it will be but I'm sure it's in the works. Cryptomark II is
still in development, I don't know where CM I stands even. Subdomain is
a pain to use. Formatguard is just fine..

I'd be interested to see a few things along that line as separate
ebuilds. Installing a Stackguard GCC3 along-side the current GCC would
be nice. Don't want to replace the default GCC.. just use the Stackguard
compiler on those things internet-facing. { And particular package
maintainers may choose to have Stackguard as a dependency. }

It occurred to me that using RH compilers might not be a bad idea (not
directly related to the above). I guess we'll have to wait-and-see what
this GCC 3.1 in Rawhide becomes.

I haven't looked at the GCC ebuilds to see what all patches are done but
RH at least keeps that aspect pretty clean. There is the whole binary
incompatibility issue which burns ppl but it's just a thought.

Anyhow... perhaps when WireX releases a GCC 3.x Stackguard we can
re-visit the issue?

-Ali

-- 
OpenPGP key 53F7FF5F
--
Well, you know boys, a nuclear reactor is a lot like a woman. You
just have to read the manual and press the right button.
-- Homer Simpson

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RE: stackguard, formatguard, etc. Andreas Kinzl <AndreasKinzl@××××××.at>