[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: 3.6% of heads up: Please correct your #includes or optflags use
- From: Adam Jackson <ajackson redhat com>
- To: Development discussions related to Fedora <fedora-devel-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: 3.6% of heads up: Please correct your #includes or optflags use
- Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:39:13 -0400
On Thu, 2008-03-20 at 14:52 +0100, Lubomir Kundrak wrote:
> Should you find any errors, or have comments or questions, don't
> hesitate to mail me.
cdparanoia appears to be a false positive:
ketamine:/redhat/core/cdparanoia/devel% grep ^gcc .build-alpha9.8-29.log | grep -v FORTIFY_SOURCE
gcc -fpic -shared -o libcdda_interface.so.0.9.8 -Wl,-soname -Wl,libcdda_interface.so.0 scan_devices.o common_interface.o cooked_interface.o interface.o scsi_interface.o smallft.o toc.o test_interface.o -lm
gcc -fpic -shared -o libcdda_paranoia.so.0.9.8 -Wl,-soname -Wl,libcdda_paranoia.so.0 paranoia.o p_block.o overlap.o gap.o isort.o -L ../interface -lcdda_interface
Unless I'm wildly mistaken, -DFOO on the command line when invoking gcc
as a fancy frontend to ld should have no effect.
There are some implicit function declarations, which I've fixed, but
memcmp() and exit() aren't fortified functions, and aren't the functions
your test warned about anyway.
- ajax
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]