glibc-2.35 - Entering slush ABI freeze / Reviewing release blockers.

[Siddhesh Poyarekar]

On 10/01/2022 21:22, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 1/6/22 09:47, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
>> On 06/01/2022 20:09, Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha wrote:
>>> Community,
>>>
>>> We are into the slushy ABI freeze. If you need to make ABI changes
>>> that are not already in the "Release Blockers" [1] list please
>>> start a discussion about them here to decide if they are really
>>> release blockers.
>>>
>>> We have 3 weeks of bug fixing and stabilization before I plan to
>>> cut the release.
>>>
>>
>> Could we have the _FORTIFY_SOURCE header fixes[1] block the release?
>> The header inconsistencies result in a number of functions (stpcpy,
>> pread, etc.) not being fortified in !_GNU_SOURCE cases.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I *also* want _FORITFY_SOURCE=3 for glibc 2.35.
> 
> I want glibc 2.35 to work with gcc 12 to enable more fortification.
> 
> With glibc 2.35 and gcc 12 coming out close to eachother I don't want to wait
> 6 months for the fixes to land in released versions of the toolchain.

I'm fairly close to home on the gcc patchset, so I can make this happen. 
  The patch I've posted to enable _FORTIFY_SOURCE=3[1] in glibc should 
be unchanged; it failed because the partial patch didn't detect everything.

I'll add it as a desirable since I can always backport if for some 
reason I'm unable to finish the gcc work in time.

Thanks,
Siddhesh

[1] 
https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/glibc/patch/20211217040753.4176265-1-siddhesh@sourceware.org/