Hide Forgot
This package failed to rebuild on x86_64 for FC4 Development around 2005-04-11 after an automated release bump. No build logs available afaics. Please request a rebuild.
x86_64 is unsupported. libsafe is i386 only. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 143327 ***
(In reply to comment #1) > x86_64 is unsupported. libsafe is i386 only. > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 143327 *** Okay -- what's this then: http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/extras/development/x86_64/libsafe-2.0-16.fdr.1.rh80.x86_64.rpm Should it be removed? And why can gentoo build for x86_64 when we can't: http://mozilla.mirrors.tds.net/pub/gentoo-portage/sys-libs/libsafe/libsafe-2.0_p16-r1.ebuild
Does it actually work? Until somebody proves that it works it should be removed. It can be dangerous otherwise.
(In reply to comment #3) > Does it actually work? Until somebody proves that it works it should be > removed. It can be dangerous otherwise. Reopening -- I'll look into that (meat: fix it or remove it from x86_64 before FC4)
s/meat/means/
With FORTIFY_SOURCE libsafe is mostly redundant, and might actually be avoided for most library calls since the built binaries call the *_chk equivalents. libsafe was useful before FORTIFY_SOURCE in cases where you were unable to use the protection of exec-shield. libsafe should theoretically not be dangerous on i386 though. I don't think it is worth the effort on x86_64. There is plenty other higher priority stuff needing fixing for FC4.
(In reply to comment #6) > I don't think it is worth the effort on x86_64. Okay, I filled a remove request for the x86_64-package on http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras_2fFC4Status > There is plenty other higher priority stuff > needing fixing for FC4. ;-)