On Thu, 26 Jul 2018, Zong Li wrote:
> In glibc now, this option doesn't pass to linker, the module is still
> not executable on stack. I think that we need this patch to fix up it or
> another patch to remove the variable in Makefile if it is not necessary.
> Both are fine for me. For now, it i
Joseph Myers 於 2018年7月26日 週四 上午4:56寫道：
>
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
> > But given the dso code has nested function, a well equipped gcc when
> > generating
> > trampoline code would also generate the GNU_STACK segment for the dso
> > automatically, without need to force the same
On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> But given the dso code has nested function, a well equipped gcc when
> generating
> trampoline code would also generate the GNU_STACK segment for the dso
> automatically, without need to force the same via the linker flags as is done
> in
> the Makefile
On 07/25/2018 01:22 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Vineet Gupta wrote:
>
>> Chiming in as I'm looking into these things myself in context of testing
>> for ARC port submission. Do we really need to fix this part - in this
>> way. I'd vote to not force the execstack through linker
On Wed, 25 Jul 2018, Vineet Gupta wrote:
> Chiming in as I'm looking into these things myself in context of testing
> for ARC port submission. Do we really need to fix this part - in this
> way. I'd vote to not force the execstack through linker and rely on gcc
> generating this itself when it
On 07/20/2018 03:14 AM, Zong Li wrote:
> The Makefile variable name loses the file extension (.so). It causes
> the linker option not applies to the corresponding file that it's
> file name matchs with the variable without LDFLAGS- prefix.
Hi,
Chiming in as I'm looking into these things myself in
