[dkg at fifthhorseman.net: Re: gpgme 1.7.0~ alpha or beta to debian experimental?]

[Maximiliano Curia]

Forwarding as requested.

----- Forwarded message from Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg at fifthhorseman.net> -----

Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 08:54:53 -0400
From: Daniel Kahn Gillmor <dkg at fifthhorseman.net>
To: Maximiliano Curia <maxy at gnuservers.com.ar>
Subject: Re: gpgme 1.7.0~ alpha or beta to debian experimental?
X-CRM114-Status: GOOD (   6.40  )

[ offlist because your response was offlist; if you intended it to be
  on-list, feel free to re-forward my reply on-list as well.  nothing in
  my message is intended to be private ]

On Fri 2016-10-07 04:33:36 -0400, Maximiliano Curia wrote:
> Qt and KDE libs are built with -fPIC, which, afaik, is stronger and 
> incompatible with -fPIE, would it be an option to use -fPIC for gpgme?

I've been reading about -fPIC and -fpic and -fPIE and -fpie and -pie for
years and i confess i've never completely understood the differences or
whether one is "stronger" than another.

gcc says of -fPIE and -fpic "generated position independent code can be
only linked into executables." which makes it seem odd that these
parameters would be passed through to building libraries in the first
place.

I'm going to try a rebuild without the extra hardening flags to see
whether i can make progress on this.

fwiw, i'd still really love some feedback about whether it's ok to take
over the binary packages i'd asked about in the first place.

        --dkg

----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
 Porque no respeta el orden natural en el que se leen las cosas
 > ¿Por qué contestar al principio del mensaje es malo?
 Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-kde-talk/attachments/20161007/5312963f/attachment.sig>