On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 11:19:33AM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 16:33:28 -0400
> Peter Jones <pjones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 06:50:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > > llvmpipe has been known to be broken for months, and nobody on the
> > > ARM team appears capable of fixing it. As a result, ARM shipped in
> > > F19 without any out of the box support for running our default
> > > desktop.
> > >
> > > This doesn't make it seem like the ARM port currently has
> > > sufficient developer expertise involved, and I'd really like to
> > > hear what the plans are for (a) fixing the existing problems, and
> > > (b) ensuring that we don't end up in a situation where other
> > > architectures are held up because there's nobody who can fix
> > > ARM-specific bugs.
> >
> >
> > I'm also concerned that stack protector does not workyet at all.
> > Even if the desktop was useable, how would we tell people that it's
> > okay to run e.g. firefox with a straight face? It's not as bad as
> > if, say, selinux didn't work, but it's a significant concern.
> >
>
> armv7 has stack protector, aarch64 which is outside of this proposal
> doesnt yet have it.
> from redhat-rpm-config
>
> redhat-rpm-config-9.1.0/rpmrc:optflags: armv7hl %{__global_cflags} -march=armv7-a -mfpu=vfpv3-d16 -mfloat-abi=hard
> redhat-rpm-config-9.1.0/rpmrc:optflags: aarch64 %{__global_cflags}
> - -fno-stack-protector
> redhat-rpm-config-9.1.0/macros:%__global_cflags -O2 -g -pipe
> - -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong
> - --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -grecord-gcc-switches %{_hardened_cflags}
>
> i agree 64 bit arm if and when it goes to primary will need it, but for
> today it is outside of the change proposal.
Thanks for clearing that up - I had been conflating the two with regards
to this specific issue.
--
Peter
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
