From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [131.179.128.68]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F5483896C2B for ; Sun, 13 Nov 2022 00:43:42 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 8F5483896C2B Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=cs.ucla.edu Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cs.ucla.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA9A160072; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 16:43:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id aW2CYGEvm9oQ; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 16:43:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A259160079; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 16:43:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.9.2 zimbra.cs.ucla.edu 3A259160079 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cs.ucla.edu; s=78364E5A-2AF3-11ED-87FA-8298ECA2D365; t=1668300221; bh=ImPTEfwPjN5J1DPajOEtph/0n25txji0LewIZINpn4I=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:To:From:Subject:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Ub8P05w51ONGDB0eu4gIR48sh3btDic702GSZYuASDjkHmjRyVTrma3ex9ehL86yf ooAFxzHVheeSuj4w708MGJFWM/bsu5niIUK+59hOJIFr7hr0bnxy77f3BcBxU709z/ 6kLV/um9dguwIBI88sKPjamuZkgA9Jb5b5qoUnCA= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id gSyZWBb8RP88; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 16:43:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.9] (cpe-172-91-119-151.socal.res.rr.com [172.91.119.151]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6B14C160072; Sat, 12 Nov 2022 16:43:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <093f16f3-eae0-dcdc-fb52-2cba3c3e23b4@cs.ucla.edu> Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 16:43:40 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.4.2 Content-Language: en-US To: Aaron Ballman Cc: Zack Weinberg , c-std-porting@lists.linux.dev, autoconf@gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org, Gnulib bugs References: <24ed5604-305a-4343-a1b6-a789e4723849@app.fastmail.com> <251923e7-57be-1611-be10-49c3067adf0d@cs.ucla.edu> From: Paul Eggert Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Subject: Re: How can Autoconf help with the transition to stricter compilation defaults? In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 2022-11-11 07:11, Aaron Ballman wrote: > Clang doesn't require such a linker (we work with various system linkers). As long as the system linkers continue to work as they have traditionally worked, we're fine. > the frontend perspective, we can't tell the difference between > "trust me this is safe because it never gets executed" and "this is a > CVE" If some system linker ever attempts to reject links with mismatched signatures, Autoconf-generated code will need to have a way to shut that off. I hope Clang maintainers can be cajoled into supporting that, if the time comes. Perhaps there can be a #pragma, or a compile-time option, to do that.