Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch
Hi Guillem,
2016-08-21 14:02 GMT+02:00 Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org>:
> Hi!
>
> On Sun, 2016-08-21 at 10:24:42 +0200, Bálint Réczey wrote:
>> I'm testing a set of patches [2] for gcc and dpkg which enable bindnow for all
>> arches and PIE for amd64, ppc64el and s390x in sync with Ubuntu.
>>
>> My assumption was that this set of architectures need the least amount of
>> additional work since they are tested already in Ubuntu, but I would be happy
>> if more ports would opt in for PIE.
>>
>> I plan filing wishlist bugs against dpkg and gcc with the patches
>> after I rebuilt a
>> few packages with the defaults.
>
> TBH I think PIE should in fact be safer to enable globally than
> bindnow, because the latter changes the run-time behavior and things
> might break (perhaps even silently) when failing to load plugins
> or similar.
Yes, in that sense enabling PIE is safer indeed. Regarding bindnow
I don't expect too many surprises either, since other distributions
already tested enabling bindnow and probably they found
most issues.
>
> From dpkg PoV enabling both, would at least require a full-archive
> rebuild, for bindnow ideally also a full autopkgtest run (as the
> updated dpkg FAQ states now, after Lucas Nussbaum approached me some
> weeks ago mentioning he was willing to do such archive-wide rebuild).
The patches at [2] seem to work well and since you expressed that you would
prefer changing both toolchain and dpkg, too, I would like to suggest running
the rebuild with those patches.
I think Matthias would be OK with the patch since it is very small and brings
Debian's gcc closer to Ubuntu's.
Lucas, could you please run the rebuild with the three patches?
I'll attach the patches to the bug reports.
Cheers,
Balint
[2] https://people.debian.org/~rbalint/ppa/pie-bindnow/
Reply to: