This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: "Peter S. Mazinger" <ps dot m at gmx dot net>
Cc: James E Wilson <wilson at specifix dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 10:59:05 -0800
Subject: Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault
References: <20051116220503.GA17247@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0511170813330.17673-100000@lnx.bridge.intra>

On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 08:17:07AM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> -fstack-protector-all (all protection) being superset of -fstack-protector 
> (random protection) it should also define __SSP__ 1

The IBM patch that I followed did exactly what I implemented.
I see no compelling reason to change it.

r~

References:
- Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: apps built w/ -fstack-protector-all segfault
  - From: Peter S. Mazinger

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]