Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > * Dirk Gouders <dirk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> For example on Gentoo systems where _FORTIFY_SOURCE is set by default, >> `make -C tools/perf' fails, because of the macro being redefined. >> >> Fix that by a feature-check analogous to tools/perf/config/Makefile. >> >> Signed-off-by: Dirk Gouders <dirk@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> tools/lib/api/Makefile | 9 ++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/lib/api/Makefile b/tools/lib/api/Makefile >> index d8fe29f..acf9097 100644 >> --- a/tools/lib/api/Makefile >> +++ b/tools/lib/api/Makefile >> @@ -16,7 +16,14 @@ MAKEFLAGS += --no-print-directory >> LIBFILE = $(OUTPUT)libapi.a >> >> CFLAGS := $(EXTRA_WARNINGS) $(EXTRA_CFLAGS) >> -CFLAGS += -ggdb3 -Wall -Wextra -std=gnu99 -Werror -O6 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fPIC >> +CFLAGS += -ggdb3 -Wall -Wextra -std=gnu99 -Werror -O6 -fPIC >> + >> +ifeq ($(DEBUG),0) >> + ifeq ($(feature-fortify-source), 1) >> + CFLAGS += -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 >> + endif >> +endif > > So how about undefining it instead and re-defining it as > _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2? > > Just in case a distro sets a weaker version - lets not accept that > weaker setting. We've always had the stronger version of it. Yes, I was suggesting something similar (but without founded reasoning), some time ago [1]. Would the "undefining-approch" mean that we should modify the handling of _FORTIFY_SOURCE in tools/perf/config/Makefile as well? Dirk [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/22/186 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
