Re: Why no i586/i686 support?

[Alan Shutko]

John Summerfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> One thing I do not understand; why has stackguard (or similar) not been 
> incorporated into gcc 2.95 and/or egcs?

Well, for one thing, not all programs will work with stackguard.  Most
notably, the Linux kernel.

But that could be fixed by having it as an option.  The real reason
(since I can't find any others on the gcc mailing lists) is probably
that it hasn't been officially contributed with legal papers signing
the copyright over to the FSF.

> A program that works is much more useful than a faster program that 
> doesn't.

But stackguard doesn't guarantee that your program works, just that if
it doesn't, it's less likely to allow an attacker to cause damage.

-- 
Alan Shutko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - In a variety of flavors!
192 days, 17 minutes, 9 seconds till we run away.
Santa's elves are just a bunch of subordinate Clauses.

-- 
To unsubscribe:
mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null