Re: [PATCH 1/5] __fdelt_chk: Removed range check

[Ryan Hill <dirtyepic at gentoo dot org>]

On Wed, 8 May 2013 13:48:07 -0600
Adam Conrad <adconrad@0c3.net> wrote:

> On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:13:54AM +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
> > On 06/05/13 00:46, Carlos O'Donell wrote:

> > Essentially.  I suppose the false positives are probably only a minor
> > inconvenience as far as Linux distros go, given most rebuild their
> > entire system when a glibc update happens and others can rebuild the
> > small number of packages that will expose this.  But this can not be so
> > readily handled with third party software.
> 
> Debian and Ubuntu (at least) certainly don't rebuild the world on every
> toolchain bump, we allow things to rebuild organically as new package
> versions are uploaded for other reasons.
> 
> If there's a simple/sane programmatic way for us to find everything that
> would be affected by (4), so we can rebuild it (and declare a package
> relationship between the new glibc and the old versions of packages that
> it's now known to break), that's cool, but if it's just tripping over
> breakages in the dark for a few years until it's all rebuilt, I'm not
> sure that's an acceptable option for us.

That's where we come in.  When your entire user base builds everything from
source you catch these issues early.


-- 
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidgets
@ gentoo.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature