[CFdiscussion] ports and FORTIFY_SOURCE

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 01:34:06PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> Dear ports developers;
> 
> This year I mentored Oliver Pinter's GSoC project [1] to port
> FORTIFY_SOURCE to FreeBSD. The project was more complex than we
> thought initially but it was successful.
> 
> For those of you that haven't heard of it, it's a trick supported by 
> libc to enable bounds-checking on common string and memory functions.
> The code has gone through extensive testing with both clang and the
> base gcc. It should work fine with newer gcc but it is untested there.
> 
> To activate it you will just need to add -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1 (or 2) in
> the CFLAGS and that will transparently add the extra checks. The code
> is non invasive but some ports (firefox, emacs) actually choose to run
> with this flag on by default and an exp-run found some errors in those
> cases.
> 
> There are currently two remaining PRs with patches for mail/ifile 
> (202572) and net-p2p/namecoin (2012603), getting those committed soon
> would avoid traumas in the ports tree once FORTIFY_SOURCE is committed.
> 
> In the future it would be nice to support a flag within ports to enable
> or disable this extra flag for specific ports. I am unsure exactly how
> to do it, it could be something as simple as
> 
> USE_FORTIFY=	yes
> or as complex as
> USES= 	compiler:fortify=0
> (0 disables it, 1 is standard for clang. 2 is standard for gcc)
> 
IMHO it should be done the exact same way as SSP was added. meaning always
activated and ports that are not playing safely with it should explicitly
disable it via:
FORTIFY_UNSAFE=yes

and a WITHOUt_FORTIFY (like we have a WITHOUT_SSP) should be added for people
willing to entirely remove it.

Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20150902/50fd6823/attachment.bin>