| 1 |
So if im reading the docs correctly do I need -fstack-protector-all |
| 2 |
and -fstack-protector in my CFLAGS to take advantage of ssp? |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
According to the docs it should be default in the hardened profile? I |
| 5 |
just need the hardened and pic USE flags right? |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
On 10/23/07, pageexec@××××××××.hu <pageexec@××××××××.hu> wrote: |
| 8 |
> On 23 Oct 2007 at 21:03, Javier Martínez wrote: |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> > 2007/10/23, Matt Poletiek <chill550@×××××.com>: |
| 11 |
> > > Any idea why when I add -fstack-protector-all and -fstack-protector to |
| 12 |
> > > CFLAGS paxtest still compiles with -fno-stack-protector |
| 13 |
> > > -fno-stack-protector-all ? |
| 14 |
> > > |
| 15 |
> > I think ssp is disabled in the Makefile. Look at there. Please take |
| 16 |
> > note that (in my opinion) paxtest should only demonstrate how pax |
| 17 |
> > works, not how ssp does. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> correct, ssp is disabled on purpose. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> -- |
| 22 |
> gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Matthew Poletiek |
| 29 |
www.chill-fu.net |
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list |
Archives