Re: [PATCHv2] feature_test_macros.7: document clang fortify support

[Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1501 bytes --]

Hi Sam, Mingye,

On 4/5/23 03:53, Sam James wrote:
> 
> Alejandro Colomar <alx.manpages@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>> Hi Mingye,
>>
>> On 4/3/23 18:24, Mingye Wang wrote:
>>> Hi Alex,
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 1, 2023 at 5:56 AM Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>>>> If it's just a reference to the software, that is fine.  If it's a
>>>> reference to the version, then I want it to be greppable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Is my patch attached to the last message all good, or is there
>>> anything more to do?
>>
>> Sorry about the delay; I'm a bit overloaded.  Did you check Sam's
>> objection?
> 
> I'm happy now after a clarification was made (libssp does more than I thought
> it did).

Thanks!  I applied the patch, with Acked-by: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>.

Cheers,
Alex

> 
>>
>> On 3/23/23 06:38, Sam James wrote:
>>> The patch looks OK to me in terms of the content, apart from the libssp
>>> mention. libssp and stack smashing protection overall is distinct from
>>> fortification.
>>>
>>> SSP is where stack canaries are emitted and their value is checked
>>> later on to see if they're intact. Fortification is where certain
>>> functions are replaced with variants that check the size of their
>>> arguments e.g. dst & src and ensure they're big enough. They're distinct.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Alex
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Mingye
> 

-- 
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
GPG key fingerprint: A9348594CE31283A826FBDD8D57633D441E25BB5

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]