large binary, why not strip ?
m.seaman at infracaninophile.co.uk
Wed Nov 26 08:49:14 PST 2008
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Kris Kennaway wrote:
>> Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most cases it
>> will be a simple matter of changing the port's do-install: target to
>> use INSTALL_* macros instead of cp/bsdtar etc. This would be a good
>> project to get some familiarity with the ports tree.
> Would it be worthwhile to add a test and warning that all installed
> have not been stripped to the 'security-check' target in bsd.port.mk?
> not really what that target was intended for (feeping creaturism alert!)
> it's the obvious place to put such a test.
> Probably cleaner to create a whole new target, but that's going to
> some code.
> Hmmmm... I shall work up some patches, probably over the weekend, so
> something substantive to talk about.
For the record, I also discovered that, contrary to what I said earlier,
there is apparently one class of binary object that will not work correctly
if stripped: kernel loadable modules.
As others have commented, most shlibs installed from ports aren't stripped.
The same applies to almost any sort of pluggable module (perl, PHP etc.) that
I have been able to investigate.
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 258 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20081126/e55ba4ee/signature.pgp
More information about the freebsd-questions