Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Implement -ffortify for C/C++

[Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>]

This is the wrong approach for a simple set of reasons:

- gcc will not be able to handle all functions which need to be
  protected:

  - POSIX functions not in ISO C/C++
  - non-standard functions

- hence gcc will have to be extended to include support to write
  wrappers outside of gcc to protect the functions for C++ as well

- but once you have such support in the compiler there is no reason to
  add any bloat to gcc by making the built-ins more complicated, the
  same thing could be implemented more transparently and with at least
  the same functionality in the system library headers


I.e., adding this new option does not solve the problem and the real
solution makes this patch unnecessary.

-- 
â Ulrich Drepper â Red Hat, Inc. â 444 Castro St â Mountain View, CA â

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature