gcc specs

Alex Merry alexander.merry at ccc.ox.ac.uk
Fri Aug 4 03:17:17 PDT 2006

On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 09:15:48PM -0400, Robert Connolly wrote:
> With the hardened specs I tried building and testing Glibc with 
> CC="gcc -no-pie -fno-pic -fno-pie -norelro -nonow -no-fortify" CXX="g++ ..." 
> and got about a dozen test Errors. This shouldn't be. These flags should be 
> equivalent to vanilla.

Same. I managed to get rid of about a fifth to a quarter of the errors
with -no-pie -fno-PIE -DFORTIFY=0, which cancelled all the flags shown
by "gcc -v" on a dummy.c file (although running gcc -v -fno-PIE showed
it was running gcc with -fPIE and -fno-PIE on the same command line).

> So anyway, I don't suggest trying to use the system created by the unstable 
> book(s) right now.

Not that I would be able to use the system I just built - the kernel
build bales out on fs/namei.o with a gcc segfault every time.

Alex :-)

Computer Monkey to the Pelican
www.oxrev.org.uk, www.corpusjcr.org, www.rev.org.uk
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/hlfs-dev/attachments/20060804/12a59eea/attachment.sig>

More information about the hlfs-dev mailing list