From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21727 invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2005 15:14:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-hacker-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 21710 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jun 2005 15:14:43 -0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:14:43 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j5OFEfKu009500 for ; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:14:41 -0400 Received: from lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (lacrosse.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.154]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j5OFEdu13259; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:14:39 -0400 Received: from [192.168.7.71] (vpn50-11.rdu.redhat.com [172.16.50.11]) by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j5OFELs08707; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:14:23 -0400 Message-ID: <42BC2325.90707@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 15:14:00 -0000 From: Ulrich Drepper User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-6 (X11/20050513) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jakub Jelinek CC: Glibc hackers , arjanv@redhat.com, rth@redhat.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] glibc part of stack protector References: <20050623222514.GC7663@sunsite.mff.cuni.cz> In-Reply-To: <20050623222514.GC7663@sunsite.mff.cuni.cz> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig6A2C278E664CCDAF6B5D4C86" X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00010.txt.bz2 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig6A2C278E664CCDAF6B5D4C86 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-length: 432 Looks good. Jakub Jelinek wrote: > I'm still undecided whether we want to export __stack_chk_guard@@GLIBC_2.4 > from ld.so on the architectures that are always going to use > the thread local area access. No. Don't let there be an ambiguities in the ABI. These archs use the TLS variable and nothing else. --=20 =E2=9E=A7 Ulrich Drepper =E2=9E=A7 Red Hat, Inc. =E2=9E=A7 444 Castro St = =E2=9E=A7 Mountain View, CA =E2=9D=96 --------------enig6A2C278E664CCDAF6B5D4C86 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-length: 251 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFCvCMl2ijCOnn/RHQRAjybAJsG8MMv1B5+pu6F1+jwYxOG2hka3wCgmpOS KQMFpefAYr/vXUbeuy4JIM8= =dg6a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig6A2C278E664CCDAF6B5D4C86--