On Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 08:02:34AM +1000, Simon Burge wrote:
   > Elad Efrat wrote:
   > 
   > > also, where is the consensus of the class of programs to protect with
   > > USE_FORT taken from? and what's the reason for it?
   > 
   > While talking about this change, it is too late to change the option
   > name to "USE_FORTIFY"?  I can't see any reason for using the abbreviated
   > "FORT" in the name.
   
   It's long and ungainly and there's something else called FORTIFY (worse,
   I suspect it's trademarked).  But USE_FORTIFY_SOURCE is even worse.

while this may be the case, "USE_FORT" makes me think of fortran.
a better name seems in order.


.mrg.