[libvirt PATCH 2/4] m4: enable -fstack-protector-strong on mingw
laine at redhat.com
Wed Jul 22 17:51:15 UTC 2020
On 7/22/20 1:21 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> Historically we avoided -fstack-protector* since it resulted in a broken
> build on Mingw. In GCC 10 in Fedora though, we have the opposite problem,
> getting a broken build if we don't enable one of the -fstack-protector*
> options. This also works in GCC 9, so we don't need to worry about the
> old brokeness which evidentally got fixed at some time without noticing.
...and I guess there's no "super old" mingw releases that we need to
worry about, since it's always the mingw on the current release of
Fedora that's used (did I get that right?)
Reviewed-by: Laine Stump <laine at redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange at redhat.com>
> m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> diff --git a/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 b/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4
> index d3538d59f8..d171d09991 100644
> --- a/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4
> +++ b/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4
> @@ -169,13 +169,11 @@ AC_DEFUN([LIBVIRT_COMPILE_WARNINGS],[
> gl_WARN_ADD([-Wframe-larger-than=262144], [RELAXED_FRAME_LIMIT_CFLAGS])
> # Extra special flags
> - dnl -fstack-protector stuff passes gl_WARN_ADD with gcc
> - dnl on Mingw32, but fails when actually used
> case $host in
> dnl "error: -fstack-protector not supported for this target [-Werror]"
> - *-*-linux*)
> + *-*-linux* | *-*-mingw*)
> dnl Prefer -fstack-protector-strong if it's available.
> dnl There doesn't seem to be great overhead in adding
> dnl -fstack-protector-all instead of -fstack-protector.
More information about the libvir-list