On (15/01/08 10:22), Adam Litke didst pronounce:
> Newer versions of GNU ld have an option to explicitly state that a
> program does not require a stack with execute permissions. In this
> case, additional security measures can be taken by the kernel and
> operating system*. Add this flag to the
On 31.01.2008 [13:00:54 -0600], Adam Litke wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:11 -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > On 16.01.2008 [11:10:22 +1100], David Gibson wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:22:19AM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> > > > Newer versions of GNU ld have an option to explicitl
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 22:11 -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 16.01.2008 [11:10:22 +1100], David Gibson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:22:19AM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> > > Newer versions of GNU ld have an option to explicitly state that a
> > > program does not require a stack with e
On 16.01.2008 [11:10:22 +1100], David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:22:19AM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> > Newer versions of GNU ld have an option to explicitly state that a
> > program does not require a stack with execute permissions. In this
> > case, additional security measures can
On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:22:19AM -0600, Adam Litke wrote:
> Newer versions of GNU ld have an option to explicitly state that a
> program does not require a stack with execute permissions. In this
> case, additional security measures can be taken by the kernel and
> operating system*. Add this f
Newer versions of GNU ld have an option to explicitly state that a
program does not require a stack with execute permissions. In this
case, additional security measures can be taken by the kernel and
operating system*. Add this flag to the top-level Makefile since none
of our targets require an e
