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


On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 10:02:23PM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Richard Henderson wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2005 at 08:40:11PM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> > > On Wed, 16 Nov 2005, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Tue, Nov 15, 2005 at 09:01:21PM +0100, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> > > > > I meant exactly this, gcc supports -fno-stack-protector (although gcc 
> > > > > defaults to no-ssp), so -fno-stack-protector-all should be there too
> > > > 
> > > > Why?  What option would it perform?
> > > 
> > > to have the possibility to override an earlier one, as it is done w/ many 
> > > fno* options. Why should this one not have it's counterpart.
> > 
> > There are three states we can be in:
> > 
> >   (0) no stack protection		-fno-stack-protector
> >   (1) heuristic stack protection	-fstack-protector
> >   (2) all stack protection		-fstack-protector-all
> > 
> > All of these three states have corresponding switches.  You can
> > use any of them at any time.
> 
> True for default configs. Let's consider though other distros like 
> ubuntu/adamantix/gentoo that can default to "(2) all stack protection"
> but sometimes, due to problems (mainly c++) -all has to be disabled. 
> -fno-stack-protector would disable all the protection, that is not what 
> would be needed.

Use -fstack-protector to return to state (1).


r~


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