Your message dated Mon, 2 Jan 2012 01:50:47 -0600
with message-id <20120102075047.gb12...@elie.hsd1.il.comcast.net>
and subject line Re: Please add an option for dpkg-buildflags to emit a
different optimization level
has caused the Debian Bug report #653846,
regarding Please add an option for dpkg-buildflags to emit a different
optimization level
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
653846: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=653846
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg-dev
Version: 1.16.1.2
Severity: wishlist
Hi Raphael,
I've started to submit patches to enable hardened build flags. After
having converted approx. 50 packages I've found the interface useful
and convenient, thanks for implementing it!
One recurring issue I found in many rules files is that they're
building with different optimization levels other than O2. In most
cases it's -O3 or -Os.
In such cases, maintainers have to query dpkg-buildflags and substitute
the output with the optimitation level of their choice.
It would be good if there were an option like --optimisation-level=3,
so that dpkg-builflags would e.g. emit CFLAGS as
"-g -O3 -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat -Wformat-security
-Werror=format-security"
Cheers,
Moritz
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Dec 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> It's perhaps ugly, but DEB_CFLAGS_MAINT_APPEND=-Os works fine for me.
>
> Why would it be ugly? I think that's the correct interface to change the
> optimization level.
Because the resulting compiler command line contains both -O2 and -Os.
But yes, I agree it's less ugly than any alternative I can imagine.
Hence closing.
Documentation patches still welcome. :)
Thanks, both.
Jonathan
--- End Message ---
