Am 21.05.2012 18:33, schrieb Daniel Pocock:
> On 21/05/12 16:22, Arno Töll wrote:
>> On 21.05.2012 17:02, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> After building, I check the binaries, it seems to think they were
>>> hardened, but some intermittent issues with `Fortify Source functions'
>>> and lintian (on mentors) complains
>>
>> The hardening-check tool (which is used by Lintian, too) is known to
>> emit false positives. See #673112 for an up to date discussion for that
>> problem.
>>
>
>
> Do I need to use a lintian-override in this case, or should I just
> ignore the warnings?
>
> I would prefer not to include an override in the package as someone
> might forget to take them out later whenever hardening-check is more
> definite
>
>
I am building my packages with hardening-wrapper since a longer time and
they are hardened, but yeah with the new lintian version there are *too
much* false positives about hardening-no-stackprotector and
hardening-no-fortify-functions.
Adding 100k lintian overwrites (about the whole archive) wouldn't be an
option, I do not know if hardening-check could be improved , if not both
checks may be disabled in lintian.
In my case I will ignore them from now on.
--
/*
Mit freundlichem Gruß / With kind regards,
Patrick Matthäi
GNU/Linux Debian Developer
E-Mail: pmatthaei@debian.org
patrick@linux-dev.org
*/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature