Hi Simon,
On Tue, 29 May 2012 03:20:12 +0200
Simon Ruderich wrote:
> No problem ;-) Thanks for applying the patch so quickly.
Helpful patch is always welcome.
# If you'll have a chance to meet me (like DebConf), let me buy you a
drink. :)
> > If hardening-check would says all hardening
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 07:46:17AM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thanks again for the lesson :)
Hi Hideki,
No problem ;-) Thanks for applying the patch so quickly.
> If hardening-check would says all hardening functions are enabled,
> do I need to check it with blhc, too?
If yo
Hi Simon,
On Mon, 28 May 2012 01:44:01 +0200
Simon Ruderich wrote:
Thanks again for the lesson :)
> you're willing to fix the build system, then using AM_CFLAGS is
> the correct approach.
Okay.
> However `hardening-check` can't know if no protection was
> necessary or if the flags are mis
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 07:31:54AM +0900, Hideki Yamane wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Thanks for your patch, but how about attached one? (almost same)
Hi Hideki,
Your patch works fine to fix the missing flags.
However AM_CPPFLAGS/CPPFLAGS are not meant for compiler flags,
but for preprocessor flags.
Hi Simon,
On Sun, 27 May 2012 01:44:21 +0200
Simon Ruderich wrote:
> The attached patch "fixes" the issue, but it's only a dirty
> workaround. The upstream build system should be fixed to not
> overwrite CPPFLAGS at all (CPPFLAGS are only for preprocessor
> flags anyway), autoconf/automake provid
Package: loqui
Version: 0.5.3-1
Severity: normal
Tags: patch
Dear Maintainer,
The CPPFLAGS hardening flags are missing because they are ignored
by the build system. For more hardening information please have a
look at [1], [2] and [3].
The attached patch "fixes" the issue, but it's only a dirty
6 matches
Mail list logo
