Hiyas,
at this time the Packaging-Guidelines do not mention whether or not %{optflags} should / must be used. They are used everytime %configure is executed, but there are also packages that do not have a ./configure script and for this reason would not use the %{optflags}. The flags in %{optflags} contain not only optimization but also security flags. For this reason I suggest that the Guidelines state that they have to be used. This will also help new contributors to know about this.
I already mentioned this in fedora-extras-list, but without much feedback, but this may be the better mailinglist: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-July/msg00178.html
Greetings, Till
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 04:12:56PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
at this time the Packaging-Guidelines do not mention whether or not %{optflags} should / must be used. They are used everytime %configure is executed, but there are also packages that do not have a ./configure script and for this reason would not use the %{optflags}. The flags in %{optflags} contain not only optimization but also security flags. For this reason I suggest that the Guidelines state that they have to be used. This will also help new contributors to know about this.
I agree, but I'd make that a recommendation instead. There are a couple of packages known to break with some optimization flags, most notably such using hand-crafted asm and not tolerating any misalignments of structures.
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 16:36, Axel Thimm wrote:
I agree, but I'd make that a recommendation instead. There are a couple of packages known to break with some optimization flags, most notably such using hand-crafted asm and not tolerating any misalignments of structures.
Is this true for security flags like -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fstack-protector? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/Features and the release notes for FC5 state, that all packages in Core and Extras are compiled with these features. For this reason at least these flags should be mandatory oder the exceptions should be mentioned in the wiki (if there are any).
Regards, Till
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 04:52:03PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
On Wednesday 23 August 2006 16:36, Axel Thimm wrote:
There are a couple of packages known to break with some optimization flags, most notably such using hand-crafted asm and not tolerating any misalignments of structures.
Is this true for security flags like -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fstack-protector?
I'm only aware of issues due to optimization, I myself haven't heard any issues about security flags, so hopefully these are safe to use.
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 16:12 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hiyas,
at this time the Packaging-Guidelines do not mention whether or not %{optflags} should / must be used. They are used everytime %configure is executed, but there are also packages that do not have a ./configure script and for this reason would not use the %{optflags}. The flags in %{optflags} contain not only optimization but also security flags. For this reason I suggest that the Guidelines state that they have to be used. This will also help new contributors to know about this.
I believe this has been ratified and is waiting for Ville to write up and enter into the guidelines:
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GuidelinesTodo http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/IRCLog20060713
-Toshio
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 09:38 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 16:12 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hiyas,
at this time the Packaging-Guidelines do not mention whether or not %{optflags} should / must be used. They are used everytime %configure is executed, but there are also packages that do not have a ./configure script and for this reason would not use the %{optflags}. The flags in %{optflags} contain not only optimization but also security flags. For this reason I suggest that the Guidelines state that they have to be used. This will also help new contributors to know about this.
I believe this has been ratified and is waiting for Ville to write up and enter into the guidelines:
http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GuidelinesTodo http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/IRCLog20060713
Thanks for the reminder, will take care of it in a jiffy.
Hello,
thank you for your fast response. In http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?action=diff#head-8b140982... you only mention C and C++ Compilers, rpm --eval %configure shows, that also FFLAGS, which I believe are for Fortran, are set with the values of %optflags.
Regards, Till
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 23:46 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hello,
thank you for your fast response. In http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?action=diff#head-8b140982... you only mention C and C++ Compilers, rpm --eval %configure shows, that also FFLAGS, which I believe are for Fortran, are set with the values of %optflags.
Thanks for the catch, improved wording is online now: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?action=diff&rev2=72&a...
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:46:14PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 23:46 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hello,
thank you for your fast response. In http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?action=diff#head-8b140982... you only mention C and C++ Compilers, rpm --eval %configure shows, that also FFLAGS, which I believe are for Fortran, are set with the values of %optflags.
If you really want to be picky, you'd have to mention FCFLAGS, too. Which is actually a bug in current FC6, let me think a bit about it.
Thanks for the catch, improved wording is online now: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?action=diff&rev2=72&a...
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:24:12PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:46:14PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 23:46 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hello,
thank you for your fast response. In http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?action=diff#head-8b140982... you only mention C and C++ Compilers, rpm --eval %configure shows, that also FFLAGS, which I believe are for Fortran, are set with the values of %optflags.
If you really want to be picky, you'd have to mention FCFLAGS, too. Which is actually a bug in current FC6, let me think a bit about it.
Hm, looks like it's broken on FC5, too. :/
Probably not that many fortran packages to make this surface.
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:28:31PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:24:12PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 09:46:14PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 23:46 +0200, Till Maas wrote:
Hello,
thank you for your fast response. In http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?action=diff#head-8b140982... you only mention C and C++ Compilers, rpm --eval %configure shows, that also FFLAGS, which I believe are for Fortran, are set with the values of %optflags.
If you really want to be picky, you'd have to mention FCFLAGS, too. Which is actually a bug in current FC6, let me think a bit about it.
Hm, looks like it's broken on FC5, too. :/
Probably not that many fortran packages to make this surface.
BTW what needs fixing are rpm and/or redhat-rpm-config, not the guidelines, the guidelines are OK.
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Axel Thimm -
Till Maas -
Toshio Kuratomi -
Ville Skyttä