On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 22:45, Peter S. Mazinger wrote: > I have really hoped that someone here can duplicate it in any environment
In that case, I'd suggest creating a bugzilla bug report. The gcc list is really more of a self-help list for gcc developers. If you want to try to debug the problem yourself, we may be able to provide useful advice. If you want someone else to look at it, then just file a bug report. You may also want to report this to the uClibc developers. They are probably more interested in looking at this than the gcc developers. > (because if fno-stack-protector-all does not even exist, then this part of > the code wasn't even tested) Isn't this the default? I.e. no stack protection at all is what gcc does by default. So clearly this has been tested. The only thing missing is that we don't have an override option, so that you can say -fstack-protector-all -fno-stack-protector-all and get the default behaviour back. If you meant something else, then you will need to explain what you meant. -- Jim Wilson, GNU Tools Support, http://www.specifix.com
