[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] configure: Undefine _FORTIFY_SOU

From: Michal Privoznik
Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] configure: Undefine _FORTIFY_SOURCE prior using it
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 19:18:37 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130411 Thunderbird/17.0.5

On 06.02.2013 16:09, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 06/02/2013 15:49, Stefan Hajnoczi ha scritto:
>>>> I don't think that's necessary. The 2nd level is the highest one [1] or 
>>>> [2].
>>>> It seems like in my case it's compiler who's defining the macro:
>>>> $ echo "int main() {return 0;}" | gcc -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -x c -
>>>> <command-line>:0:0: warning: "_FORTIFY_SOURCE" redefined [enabled by 
>>>> default]
>>>> <stdin>:1:0: note: this is the location of the previous definition
>>>> in which case we must undefine it. However, if the _FORTIFY_SOURCE is
>>>> defined by environment, I think we should not override it. So maybe need
>>>> a different approach. Anyway, with current state I cannot compile. I am 
>>>> using
>>>> gcc version 4.7.2 (Gentoo 4.7.2 p1.3, pie-0.5.5)
>> It would be nice to fix this for QEMU 1.4 but my gcc FORTIFY_SOURCE foo
>> is not strong enough to know what the best approach is here.
>> Reviews from anyone else?
> I would prefer to avoid having _FORTIFY_SOURCE completely, and let
> distros do it.  Alternatively, tie it to a new --enable switch which
> would do -U -D.
> But if there is a real problem for 1.4 the patch looks good.
> Paolo

Sorry for resurrecting such old thread, but what's the conclusion then?
I keep hitting this problem and I am tired of having one single patch on
the top of HEAD. And I bet others ran into this as well.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]