httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <>
Subject Re: [PATCH] PIE support
Date Tue, 25 Jan 2005 16:45:42 GMT
I'm --very-- confused by the first commit this morning.  Care
to answer the questions below before we keep throwing options
and more config gook into an already crufty build system?

My biggest concern is that this certainly doesn't seem to be
a good candidate for individual build scripts.  This seems
to make much more sense as an element of either autoconf or
libtool, themselves.


At 02:53 PM 1/21/2005, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>I'm wondering - we already have a pretty massive list of odds-n-ends
>option flags...
>does it make sense to;
>  1. make this default for GCC builds?
>  2. document how to use LDFLAGS/CFLAG to accomplish the same?
>It seems the mechanism already exists and proliferating flags
>gets a bit nutty.  If we accept 1. above, then a flag to disable
>this feature seems sane.  If we don't, it seems that libtool would
>be an even better place to teach "build PIE always" for those
>concerned with the possible security benefits.
>At 12:52 PM 1/21/2005, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>--On Friday, January 21, 2005 2:46 PM +0000 Joe Orton <> wrote:
>>>Modern versions of GCC/binutils/... support flags which allow building
>>>"Position Independent Executables".  This a Security Feature (TM) which
>>>means that executables can be loaded at non-fixed locations, making it
>>>harder to write some types of exploit.
>>>Any objections for committing to the trunk?
>>I'm fine with it in trunk, but I'd be against a 2.0 backport...  -- justin

View raw message