In D3043#205126, @ngie wrote:

Is this review still valid?

Is this review still valid?

We will be abandoning this idea altogether:

hmm, apparently this sat in my account unsubmitted. No idea is it still useful.

Hi David;

I did a detailed review, which Phabricator appears to have eaten. I'll try to summarise here, as there was some talk of committing this, and it is a long way away from being ready to go in the tree:

Update comments from regarding man page.
(I will let Oliver answer David's concerns.)

Fix manpage comments. Thanks!

I've done a partial review. This needs a lot more work before it's close to being ready to commit. I stopped after seeing the same logic errors repeated in many functions - there may be new kinds of error, but please fix the ones that are repeated everywhere first.

Updated the manpage according to wblock's feedback.

I suspect I am a man page away from something I can commit ;)..

As always, thanks for the feedback.

Small updates to the manpage: still a long way to go.

Rebase again: underscore attribute name.

Rebase cdefs.h

Some thoughts from a first read through the man page.

Minor cleanups + initial attempt at providing a man page.

Oliver ... please stop opening differential revisions. It doesn't help at all.

Missing the *_chk functions, without them nothing works.

Oliver Pinter (4):

FBSD FORTIFY: fix spelling in WITHOUT_FORTIFY
FBSD FORTIFY: update gcc build script
FBSD FORTIFY: add the ability do disable FORTIFY_SOURCE per compiler
FBSD FORTIFY: blacklist from fortified build in gcc case the libbfd, objdump and libsqlite3