Skip to content

toolchain: warn for unsafe library/header paths

Romain Naour buildroot 1 version New

Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]

Versions newest first

  1. v1 Latest0 of 12 patches 0 repliesNew

Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet

None of the 12 patches the cover letter announces are in this archive.

Reviews trailers per patch

No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v1 yet.

Read the v1 thread

Cover letter [Buildroot] [PATCH 00/12] toolchain: warn for unsafe library/header paths

Hi Thomas,

Le 20/08/2014 15:06, Thomas Petazzoni a ?crit :

Quoted 19 lines

Hello,

This series is a respin of the patch I sent a long time ago to improve the external toolchain wrapper to warn/error when unsafe library or header paths are used.

This series extend this significantly by:

- Making sure the external toolchain wrapper logic will work even if Buildroot is built from /usr. To do this, we assume only /usr/include and /usr/local/include are unsafe header paths, and /usr/lib and /usr/local/lib are unsafe library paths. Other locations in /usr are assumed to be safe.

- Covering the internal toolchain backend as well, by borrowing/adapting gcc and binutils patches from CodeSourcery/Yocto. The compiler and linker directly check for unsafe paths in -I/-L options.

Quoted 9 lines

- Adding a Config.in option to control the usage of this mechanism. When the option is disabled, only warnings are emitted. When the option is enabled, any unsafe header or library path will make the compilation fail.

Of course, this series is not meant for 2014.08, but for 2014.11.

Feedback welcome,

First of all, thanks for your work on this topic !

I'm using this series during investigations on build errors reported by autobuilders.

I discovered four packages that use unsafe paths:
tmux, ipset, aircrack-ng (-I/usr/local/include)
iprutils (-I/usr/include/ncurses)

Do you know why the upstream status of the gcc patch is "Inappropriate" ? There is a way that this patch get merged into the mainline gcc ? My colleague Adrien asked my about that.

Also, BR_COMPILER_PARANOID_UNSAFE_PATH needs to be renamed to BR2_COMPILER_PARANOID_UNSAFE_PATH to follow the naming scheme ?

Best regards,
Romain

Read the cover letter in its thread