-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 02/04/08 05:45, Riku Voipio wrote: > On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 08:53:00PM +0100, Moritz Muehlenhoff wrote: >> Did you followup with upstream on the SSP problems we've seen >> on ARM? > > Basicly their response was basicly "why would anyone want > 5-10% bigger and slower binaries on arm". It was also discussed
Just MNSHO: Because ARM systems are almost always embedded, and don't get updated very often, so from the start should be as hardened as possible against attack. And if that means a 10% slowdown, so be it. > the possibility of --disable-ssp we use on our current arm/armel > toolchain being broken. Once I have a bit more time I'll try > seeing what happens if you build gcc-4.3 with ssp enabled. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA PETA - People Eating Tasty Animals -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHpwaBS9HxQb37XmcRAqReAKDB0EjCnQ7eOA9/D2Ni0A4OpXyAcACdHXoz XUDrWQyvB8uFH4rwJEI27fY= =Iwd3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
