| 1 |
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 02:02:00 -0400, Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> dammit are we over complicating this? |
| 3 |
> You guys seem to be hung up on silly USE/FEATURE flag names. |
| 4 |
> How about we as Ciaran McCreesh proposed just add it to CFLAGS by |
| 5 |
> default and deploy stages in such a manner. |
| 6 |
> Solves everything for most cases and leave the option up to the user to |
| 7 |
> disable if he/she wants to. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
I agree with that. The prospect of some complex FEATURES/USE system |
| 11 |
adding CFLAGS scares me. The issue of weather -fstack-protector in |
| 12 |
CFLAGS would take precedence over its addition or removal by |
| 13 |
FEATURES/USE related functions could get needlessly confusing, and |
| 14 |
adding it globally cant be that big a performance hit. Also, things |
| 15 |
get more confusing when you keep in mind that some users will want it |
| 16 |
globally while some will want it only on at-risk packages. I'd be all |
| 17 |
for a selective SSP system, but please, keep it simple. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Colin |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives