Bug 203751 - lang/gcc : backport fstack-protector-strong (from lang/gcc48)
Summary: lang/gcc : backport fstack-protector-strong (from lang/gcc48)
Status: Closed FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Ports & Packages
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Individual Port(s) (show other bugs)
Version: Latest
Hardware: Any Any
: --- Affects Some People
Assignee: Gerald Pfeifer
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-10-13 21:07 UTC by Antoine Brodin
Modified: 2015-11-09 08:33 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
bugzilla: maintainer-feedback? (gerald)

Attachments
patch (13.10 KB, patch)
2015-10-13 21:08 UTC, Antoine Brodin 		no flags Details | Diff
View All Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Antoine Brodin freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-13 21:07:45 UTC 
In FreeBSD head, fstack-protector-strong is now default.

The exp-run was done with fstack-protector-all, so the fact that lang/gcc didn't know about fstack-protector-strong was missed.

This breaks a few ports that have USE_GCC=yes and use bsd.*.mk

The attached patch backports fstack-protector-strong from lang/gcc48 to lang/gcc
Comment 1 Antoine Brodin freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-13 21:08:27 UTC 
Created attachment 161999 [details]
patch
Comment 2 Pedro F. Giffuni freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-16 01:23:55 UTC 
(comment #0)

I should clarify: I don't think the exp-run with -stack-protector-strong would have caught anything different: USE_GCC was turned on in the reported situation because the platform (powerpc64) doesn't support well clang at this time. I think the affected  ports also shouldn't be depending on the system flags.

Backporting the patch to lang/gcc is a good idea though.
Comment 3 Antoine Brodin freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-16 05:41:31 UTC 
(In reply to Pedro F. Giffuni from comment #2)
It would have shown 3 new failures on amd64/i386
Comment 4 Pedro F. Giffuni freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-17 14:09:26 UTC 
Alternatively, this Code differential should "fix" it:

https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3924
Comment 5 Enji Cooper freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-10-17 20:44:29 UTC 
(In reply to Antoine Brodin from comment #1)

LGTM!
Comment 6 commit-hook freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-11-09 08:28:05 UTC 
A commit references this bug:

Author: gerald
Date: Mon Nov  9 08:27:41 UTC 2015
New revision: 401086
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/ports/401086

Log:
  "Backport" the  -fstack-protector-strong patchset from lang/gcc48 to
  lang/gcc.

  PR:		203751, 186852 [1]
  Submitted by:	software-freebsd@interfasys.ch [1]

Changes:
  head/lang/gcc/files/patch-stackprotector-gcc
  head/lang/gcc/files/patch-stackprotector-gcc_c-family
  head/lang/gcc/files/patch-stackprotector-gcc_doc
  head/lang/gcc/files/patch-stackprotector-gcc_testsuite
Comment 7 Gerald Pfeifer freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 2015-11-09 08:33:38 UTC 
(In reply to Pedro F. Giffuni from comment #4)
> Alternatively, this Code differential should "fix" it:
>
> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D3924

I understand this has happened now, but in addition it still made
sense to "backport" the -fstack-protector-strong patchset, which I
just committed.