Ian Lance Taylor writes:
> If you do use PEX_SAVE_TEMPS, then the caller provides the base name
> and the suffix, and the caller is responsible for making good
> choices.
It doesn't look like the caller can specify a different base name for
each stage in the pipeline, is the thing.
zw
Zack Weinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The interface looks sound to me with one exception: it's not safe to
> conflate !-pipe with -save-temps, because that opens up the
> possibility of a tempfile race -- if an attacker sees that the
> compiler is producing /tmp/ccQWERTY.s, then they should
The interface looks sound to me with one exception: it's not safe to
conflate !-pipe with -save-temps, because that opens up the
possibility of a tempfile race -- if an attacker sees that the
compiler is producing /tmp/ccQWERTY.s, then they should not be able to
predict that the assembler will pro
"E. Weddington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thanks for taking a look at this again. A solution is badly needed.
> Would this be targeted for 4.0, perhaps?
No promises from me on that front. Let's get it into mainline first.
After it is working on mainline, it would be reasonable to propose
mo
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
As noted in PR 14316, collect2 doesn't build on Windows due to the use
of vfork. There have been at least two patches to address this, one
of them from me, one from Zack.
My patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg01445.html
Zack had some comments:
As noted in PR 14316, collect2 doesn't build on Windows due to the use
of vfork. There have been at least two patches to address this, one
of them from me, one from Zack.
My patch is here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2004-03/msg01445.html
Zack had some comments:
http://gcc.gnu.org/m
