Re: wip/cliqz: Request for review

[Santhosh Raju <santhosh.raju%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 8:36 PM Santhosh Raju <santhosh.raju%gmail.com@localhost> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2019 at 3:34 AM Roland Illig <roland.illig%gmx.de@localhost> wrote:
> >
> > The NOT_PAX_MPROTECT_SAFE could need a bit more of an explanation. The
> > associated Git commit only says "Fixed build in netbsd/amd64". I'd like
> > to know what exactly the error messages were (if any) or what other
> > reason makes these lines in the Makefile necessary. An internet browser
> > written in C/C++ should definitely have all available security measures
> > enabled by default.
> >
>
> This was taken directly from the www/firefox Makefile[1] lines 35-37,
> I am not sure why it was done in www/firefox but I have commented out
> NOT_PAX_MPROTECT_SAFE for now in cliqz to check if anyone has issues
> running it.
>

leot@ updated me on this,

"Regarding cliqz/firefox MPROTECT is needed probably because there is
memory mapped with RWX bit as part of the JavaScript JIT... with
NOT_PAX_MPROTECT_SAFE commented out it will probably crash and
run-time"

So I guess I should keep them? Unfortunately I do not have a runtime
environment at the moment where I can test this out.

--
Santhosh