Re: [gentoo-hardened] pwdb+pam+propolice failure

[security mailing lists]

This was using the completely out of the box standard 1.4 release live
cd.  I didn't unmask anything at all,  just added stack protection to
make.conf.  This is an AthlonXP 2100 (MSI-KT3-Ultra2 w/512MB)Here are
some of the options from make.conf

CHOST=i686-pc-linux-gnu
CFLAGS="-O3 -march=athlon-xp -fstack-protector -funroll-loops -pipe"

Nothing unmasked or modified (ACCEPT_KEYWORDS commented out, etc) so
this was all standard packages (gcc-3.2.3-r1 and glibc-2.3.2-r1).

I don't see anything on bugs.gentoo.com for problems with pam and stack
protection,  just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something before
I submitted the bug.  The gentoo propolice project website says that
things should compile out of the box with the proper gcc/glibc used
above.



> On Fri, 2003-08-08 at 10:02, Boyd Waters wrote:
> > security mailing lists wrote:
> > > When building a system from the ground up using stack protection,
> > > emerge system fails while building PAM.  It complains the pam pwdb
> > > module did not get built.
> > >
> > > If I rebuild pwdb without stack protection, though it compiled fine with
> > > it the first time,  I can then build pam with stack protection without
> > > any problems.
> > >
> > > This was using the base CD and the normal install process with just
> > > -fstack-protection added to /etc/make.conf before bootstrap (stage2)
> >
> >
> > Curious... I did not run into this problem, building a system from
> > ground up with GCC 3.3 --
> >
> > I have an ebuild for a gcc-3.3 that uses the ProPolice patch from last
> > week, which was a more-recent patch than the standard 3.3 that was in
> > portage -- but I see that this is now gcc-3.3-r1 as of 04-August.
> >
> > Have you searched http://bugs.gentoo.org for this situation? It sounds
> > like a good bug report to me! What type of processor are you using? What
> > gcc/propolice version?
> >
> > -- boyd
> >
> >

--
gentoo-hardened@g.o mailing list