public inbox for cygwin@cygwin.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: [1.7] rebaseall doesn't solve the problem
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 19:51:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090228195127.GA26646@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49A986B4.2080501@cwilson.fastmail.fm>

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 01:47:16PM -0500, Charles Wilson wrote:
>Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>
>> Way cool, Chuck.  Especially the fact that this tool can also mark
>> executables with the TS-aware flag (doesn't make sense for DLLs, afaik).
>> This helps to test if setting this flag in Cygwin binaries will
>> allow Cygwin to run on 2008 with TS without disabling DEP.
>
>Well, the tool would need a little tweaking I think. Right now it skips
>any image (DLL or exe) that does not contain relocations.
>
>> If so, I'm wondering if setting the TS-aware flag shouldn't become
>> default in GCC.  What do you say, Dave?  Would that be possible?
>
>I'd probably wait on that for the /next/ release (e.g. after 4.3.2-2),
>so we can get aslr integerated into rebase, and the rebaseall changes
>tested.  Should I also add a switch to rebaseall that means: ONLY alsr,
>NO rebasing.  There's already a flag that allows you to add .exe's to
>the "rebase" list -- but you can't remove dll's and .so's from the list.
>
>Maybe the aslr functionality is different enough -- and useful in enough
>contexts that differ from rebasing -- that instead of incorporating
>'call aslr TOO' into rebaseall, there should be a separate 'aslrall' script?

It should be trivial to add this to binutils.  Doesn't it ultimately
belong in ld and (maybe) objcopy?

I can add this now but I don't think it should be the default just yet.

>> That would also allow to drop the ugly TS hack I added to Cygwin 1.7.
>> All newly built binaries would have the flag set already, and older
>> binaries could be tweaked with the aslr utility.
>
>That would be nice.  However, ONLY exe's linked with cygwin1.dll should
>be marked this way, right?  Not cygcheck, strace, and whatever other few
>exes we might find in the cygwin installation lists.

Do the exes themselves need this bit as well as the dlls?

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-02-28 19:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-02-21  2:27 Charles Wilson
2009-02-24 10:06 ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-02-27 21:22   ` Charles Wilson
2009-02-28 10:43     ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-02-28 18:50       ` Charles Wilson
2009-02-28 19:34         ` Matt Wozniski
2009-02-28 19:51         ` Christopher Faylor [this message]
2009-02-28 20:04           ` Charles Wilson
2009-02-28 20:29           ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-02-28 21:30             ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-01  9:47               ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-01 10:05                 ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-02 12:08             ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-02 15:14               ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-03  1:45                 ` Dave Korn
2009-03-03  2:06                   ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-03  2:44                     ` Dave Korn
2009-03-03 14:31                       ` Dave Korn
2009-03-03  4:28                   ` Christopher Faylor
2009-03-03  4:51                     ` Dave Korn
2009-03-03  5:07                       ` Christopher Faylor
2009-03-03  5:46                         ` Dave Korn
2009-02-28 20:16         ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-02-28 21:19           ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-01 10:20             ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-02  3:52               ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-04  6:00               ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-04  6:01                 ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-04  8:49                   ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-04 11:19                     ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-04 14:59                       ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-04 15:30                         ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-05  3:39                           ` peflags utility [Was: Re: [1.7] rebaseall doesn't solve the problem] Charles Wilson
2009-03-05  3:55                             ` Dave Korn
2009-03-16  6:33                             ` peflags utility Charles Wilson
2009-03-16 12:43                               ` Corinna Vinschen
2009-03-17  6:49                               ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-10  0:30               ` [1.7] rebaseall doesn't solve the problem Matthew Woehlke
2009-03-10 13:34                 ` Charles Wilson
2009-03-10 18:39                   ` Matthew Woehlke
2009-03-11  3:55                   ` ABCD
2009-04-09  3:18 Jonathan
2009-04-09  3:55 Charles Wilson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090228195127.GA26646@ednor.casa.cgf.cx \
    --to=cgf-use-the-mailinglist-please@cygwin.com \
    --cc=cygwin@cygwin.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).