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
1 Well, WireX hasn't yet released a modern Stackguard compiler. Don't know
2 how long it will be but I'm sure it's in the works. Cryptomark II is
3 still in development, I don't know where CM I stands even. Subdomain is
4 a pain to use. Formatguard is just fine..
5
6 I'd be interested to see a few things along that line as separate
7 ebuilds. Installing a Stackguard GCC3 along-side the current GCC would
8 be nice. Don't want to replace the default GCC.. just use the Stackguard
9 compiler on those things internet-facing. { And particular package
10 maintainers may choose to have Stackguard as a dependency. }
11
12 It occurred to me that using RH compilers might not be a bad idea (not
13 directly related to the above). I guess we'll have to wait-and-see what
14 this GCC 3.1 in Rawhide becomes.
15
16 I haven't looked at the GCC ebuilds to see what all patches are done but
17 RH at least keeps that aspect pretty clean. There is the whole binary
18 incompatibility issue which burns ppl but it's just a thought.
19
20 Anyhow... perhaps when WireX releases a GCC 3.x Stackguard we can
21 re-visit the issue?
22
23 -Ali
24
25 --
26 OpenPGP key 53F7FF5F
27 --
28 Well, you know boys, a nuclear reactor is a lot like a woman. You
29 just have to read the manual and press the right button.
30 -- 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>