| 1 |
Hi! |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Solars mail raised some questions for me. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
On tor, 2008-01-17 at 11:57 -0800, Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> Of course there is the KQ overlay. For those who simply want basic |
| 8 |
> hardening that have no desire to wait for it to hit the tree. I'd |
| 9 |
> suggest just unmasking gcc-4, build it and then injecting some gcc |
| 10 |
> specs to handle it auto building hardened alike bins. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
As I understand this KQ's overlay is just basic hardening? How does this |
| 14 |
differ (if it does) from solars first suggestion? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Is the stuff hitting portage base on KQ's or will it be based on |
| 17 |
something diffrent (is KQ's worth toying with it or does it seem more |
| 18 |
like the final implementation can be something breaking it)? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
And is there any status of when it will hit portage (does not need to be |
| 21 |
a timeframe, more like if there are mayor problems to overcome in the |
| 22 |
implementation or if it is just a "minor" (maybe not that minor as the |
| 23 |
problems that can arise from it are not that minor) thing like concerns |
| 24 |
about breaking toolchain, or someone have not had the time to review it |
| 25 |
well enough)? |
Archives