This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] PT_GNU_STACK
- From: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- To: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Nick Clifton <nickc at redhat dot com>, binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 00:39:03 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] PT_GNU_STACK
- References: <20030524103021.GL16629@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <3ED28DB7.7080900@redhat.com> <m3r86hybna.fsf@redhat.com> <3EDA7148.2090403@redhat.com> <20030601214733.GO24872@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> <3EDA7B4E.8070803@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 06:16:46PM -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> That's true. But is it reasonable to assume that a non-branded .o file
> should be rwx? It's going to make it too easy to accidently create
IMHO yes. There is always -z execstack or -z noexecstack in my patch,
where the developer can override the automatic decision.
> The intent was names, not contents, could be used to make the decision
> and that would avoid the double read.
But section names aren't visible at runtime. Unless ld is patched, you'd
end up with zero to 2 zero-sized PT_NOTE sections. Am I missing something?
Jakub