Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933913AbYBVX7y (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:59:54 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757724AbYBVX7l (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:59:41 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:32786 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760508AbYBVX7k (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:59:40 -0500 Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:59:14 -0500 From: Dave Jones To: Greg KH Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sam@ravnborg.org, arjan@infradead.org, gregkh@suse.de, stable@kernel.org, stable-commits@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [stable] patch kbuild-allow-fstack-protector-to-take-effect.patch added to 2.6.24-stable tree Message-ID: <20080222235914.GC20829@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , Greg KH , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sam@ravnborg.org, arjan@infradead.org, gregkh@suse.de, stable@kernel.org, stable-commits@vger.kernel.org References: <200802190005.m1J05SKP017015@hera.kernel.org> <20080222230103.CC4EF14540D0@imap.suse.de> <20080222230604.GA20829@redhat.com> <20080222231808.GA30669@kroah.com> <20080222233407.GB20829@redhat.com> <20080222234216.GA25809@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080222234216.GA25809@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1126 Lines: 28 On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 03:42:16PM -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > I thought that thread was for the much larger patches, not just this > > > Makefile change. > > > > At the least we'll likely want to also pick up the other stack protector fixes > > that went into .25rc if we turn it on in .24 > > Hm, that sounds like a new feature :) > > I thought the makefile change was just a bugfix in the broken makefile. Well, it is. But it'll cause it to enable something that has been broken for a while. FWIW, I think having the stack protector reenabled in -stable is a worthwhile goal, but only once it's stabilised for a while in the development tree. My fear by just reenabling this for -stable is that when distros push out updates based on the latest -stable, we'll see more systems like James' problematic system. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/