Dominique Pelle wrote:
> > This makes sense. It actually mentions that -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 may
> > break confirming programs. This also means it should never be the
> > default. So perhaps you can file a bug that the default should be to
> > use 1.
> >
> > The argument is only needed for GCC 4 and later, right? That's why I
> > didn't notice this, I'm using gcc 3.4.6 (FreeBSD is very conservative
> > about gcc versions, for a good reason). So we can add a configure
> > check.
> >
> > The patch below should work, if the information is correct.
[...]
> Yes, the patch adds -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1
> to CFLAGS in src/auto/config.mk (good).
Glad this works. Thanks for testing.
> Patching eval.c is not necessary, at least for gcc
> since compilation warning & runtime crash do not
> happen with _FORTIFY_SOURCE=1, they
> only happens when doing -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2.
It's not for this specific problem, but to make it consistent with the
other place where the warning is avoided. But one of them doesn't have
a constant string, so we don't actually need it there. Only where
"self" and "000" are copied into v->di_key.
--
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
269. You wonder how you can make your dustbin produce Sesame Street's
Oscar's the Garbage Monster song when you empty it.
/// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
/// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
\\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org ///
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
