Steve, as you said in that thread, actually those assertions have helped uncover a bug (tagged as "critical")! I don't see any way in which they could "add additional crashes" if upstream does their homework. So I don't think it's a good idea to remove them. Iñaki On Fri, 2 Aug 2019 at 17:47, Steven A. Falco <stevenfalco@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The upstream KiCAD project has requested that I remove GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS from the Fedora package, as described here: https://bugs.launchpad.net/kicad/+bug/1838448 > > What is the best way to do that? I can add "%undefine _hardened_build" (which I am testing now) but I think that will remove other hardening features that I might want to leave enabled. > > Steve > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Iñaki Úcar _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
