Summary: | PAM fails to compile when either it or pwdb is compiled with -fstack-protector | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Vince Castellano <surye80> |
Component: | [OLD] GCC Porting | Assignee: | PAM Gentoo Team (OBSOLETE) <pam-bugs+disabled> |
Status: | VERIFIED REMIND | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | EvvL, kumba, pebenito, rickardm, solar, stian |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | x86 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Vince Castellano
2003-07-03 20:18:03 UTC
Az, we should make sys-libs/pwdb optional because only pam_radius.so and pam_pwdb.so need it anyways.. both of these arent really crucial. please see my post to -dev mailing list with respect to this. subject was something like: "possibly trim sys-libs/pwdb from profiles" by the way, the bug reporter is not correct, my PAM works just fine with propolice. the problem is just the pwdb crap. *** Bug 24353 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** I ran into this the other day trying to recompile my x86 system using the propolice in gcc-3.3-r1. I thought it was a gcc-3.3 bug...Seems not to be the case. I doubled checked this error on sparc64 as well, and using -fstack-protector there, it also fails as well. I've added filter-flags "-fstack-protector" to the pwdb ebuilds. This should resolve the issue (for now). so can we close this? I'd think this could be closed now. It's a shame however that -fstack has to be filtered for pwdb. Anybody know the root reason of why pwdb could not cope with the flag? It smashes the stack at one point? Probably just a byte of in a string. (I have seen gcc 3.3 and higher smash stack if you re-use arrays in different variables and use -O2 or higher) The problem is in general pwdb .. security issues is one reason why we switched from pam_pwdb to pam_unix again ... Closing, as it is no longer an issue. |