[PATCH] D14571: [ELF2] - Implemented PT_GNU_STACK support, -z execstack option.

[Rui Ueyama via llvm-commits]

Fair. I want to make LLD useful (or useable at least) on NetBSD, so adding
PT_GNU_STACK unconditionally wouldn't work. But, I don't want to copy the
nastiness of the existing linkers checking all input files' .note.GNU-stack
sections. I want to do that in a different way.

What if you want to make stack executable on NetBSD, how can you control it?

On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-commits <
llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 08:58:14AM -0800, Rui Ueyama wrote:
> > Does a loader reject an executable if it does not understand PT_GNU_STACK
> > section?
>
> Yes. We got a bug report last month exactly about this kind of situation.
> Given that there is no sane way for stripping a program header entry,
> that's quite nasty.
>
>
> > > The problem is that there are legacy loaders e.g. on PowerPC that can't
> > > be updated. It's not supported on NetBSD because the stack is not
> > > executable by default, period. But that's a slightly different story.
> > >
> >
> > Why do you want to use a new linker with an older system?
>
> Same reason for why people update the compiler. The hardware exists, no
> reason not to maximize the usefulness.
>
> Joerg
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20151116/c8891ab3/attachment.html>