From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Feb 13 07:18:25 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E3965B5
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:18:25 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from FreeBSD@shaneware.biz)
Received: from ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net (ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net
 [IPv6:2001:44b8:8060:ff02:300:1:6:5])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3767F08
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:18:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ppp247-71.static.internode.on.net (HELO leader.local)
 ([203.122.247.71])
 by ipmail05.adl6.internode.on.net with ESMTP; 13 Feb 2013 17:48:23 +1030
Message-ID: <511B3E3D.5010005@ShaneWare.Biz>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 17:48:21 +1030
From: Shane Ambler <FreeBSD@ShaneWare.Biz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dmitry Marakasov <amdmi3@amdmi3.ru>
Subject: Re: CLANG and -fstack-protector
References: <CA+7WWSeFh9sJyo3kKD5wTEHoyTSjR6TuDDgDCV5Nhc_wMzVUkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20130213022215.GK99263@hades.panopticon>
In-Reply-To: <20130213022215.GK99263@hades.panopticon>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Kimmo Paasiala <kpaasial@gmail.com>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:18:25 -0000

On 13/02/2013 12:52, Dmitry Marakasov wrote:

> afaik, in prior discussion some years ago an issue was mentioned that
> some ports don't build with stack-protector, so I suggested to introduce
> STACK_PROTECTOR_SAFE/_UNSAFE knobs similar to what we have for
> MAKE_JOBS_SAFE_/_UNSAFE (we might actually only need
> STACK_PROTECTOR_UNSAFE, as unlike MAKE_JOBS, build errors caused by
> enabling stack protector are not transient, so we can have an exp-run
> to just mark all uncompatible ports and consider all others compatible).
>
> If there's interest in this, I can refresh the patch and submit it.
>

I think it sounds like a good idea - I'd go with only specify unsafe 
when needed.