Re: [libvirt PATCH 2/4] m4: enable -fstack-protector-strong on mingw
On 7/22/20 1:21 PM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
Historically we avoided -fstack-protector* since it resulted in a
broken
build on Mingw. In GCC 10 in Fedora though, we have the opposite problem,
getting a broken build if we don't enable one of the -fstack-protector*
options. This also works in GCC 9, so we don't need to worry about the
old brokeness which evidentally got fixed at some time without noticing.
...and I guess there's no "super old" mingw releases that we need to
worry about, since it's always the mingw on the current release of
Fedora that's used (did I get that right?)
Reviewed-by: Laine Stump <laine(a)redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange(a)redhat.com>
---
m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 b/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4
index d3538d59f8..d171d09991 100644
--- a/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4
+++ b/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4
@@ -169,13 +169,11 @@ AC_DEFUN([LIBVIRT_COMPILE_WARNINGS],[
gl_WARN_ADD([-Wframe-larger-than=262144], [RELAXED_FRAME_LIMIT_CFLAGS])
# Extra special flags
- dnl -fstack-protector stuff passes gl_WARN_ADD with gcc
- dnl on Mingw32, but fails when actually used
case $host in
aarch64-*-*)
dnl "error: -fstack-protector not supported for this target
[-Werror]"
;;
- *-*-linux*)
+ *-*-linux* | *-*-mingw*)
dnl Prefer -fstack-protector-strong if it's available.
dnl There doesn't seem to be great overhead in adding
dnl -fstack-protector-all instead of -fstack-protector.