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@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> --- 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 aarch64-*-*) 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.
