From owner-freebsd-security  Fri Nov 17 22:45:24 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from silby.com (cb34181-c.mdsn1.wi.home.com [24.183.3.139])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2695537B4CF
	for <security@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 17 Nov 2000 22:45:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 45459 invoked by uid 1000); 18 Nov 2000 06:45:20 -0000
Received: from localhost (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 18 Nov 2000 06:45:20 -0000
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 00:45:20 -0600 (CST)
From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
To: David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc: Warner Losh <imp@village.org>, Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.ORG>,
	security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: FYI: Propolice for gcc-2.95.2
In-Reply-To: <20001117181107.B33370@dragon.nuxi.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0011180042580.40759-100000@achilles.silby.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org


On Fri, 17 Nov 2000, David O'Brien wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 06:08:35PM -0700, Warner Losh wrote:
> > My concern would be if we put this into the 2.95.2 tree that we have.
> 
> It won't go in.  Period.

Perhaps <large blinking disclaimer> if it works well </large blinking
disclaimer>, the patch can be put into contrib, and there can be a single
switch to throw that will cause the patch to be applied during buildworld,
resulting in everything being compiled with the stack protection as well.

(Assuming the world is compiled with the just-compiled compiler, I'm not
too familiar with the innards of the build process.)

Mike "Silby" Silbersack



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message