Re: Initial work on post-1.0 roadmap

[Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>]

On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 06:14:13AM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> On 08/30/2013 12:03:57 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 01:46:30AM -0400, Rich Felker wrote:
> >> This message is purely some notes for tracking and possible
> >discussion
> >> of things to do after musl 1.0 is released. I'm leaning towards (but
> >> undecided) maintaining separate 1.0.x and 1.1.x branches after
> >the 1.0
> >> release, the 1.0.x being just bug-fixes and backports of
> >non-invasive
> >> changes, and real development taking place in the 1.1.x series. The
> >> below items should probably then be arranged into a 1.1.x-series
> >> roadmap based on how much seems reasonable to get done per release
> >> (roughly, per month), and which features are in the highest demand.
> >
> >One more item (well, a big multi-part item):
> >
> >Security features -- RELRO processing in the dynamic linker, a
> >replacement for _FORTIFY_SOURCE (as a layer on top of libc's headers
> >rather than part of libc's headers), making it possible to build libc
> >itself with stack-protector, possibly nonstandard interfaces needed
> >for using kernel security features well, adapting malloc's footer
> >bookkeeping to make it difficult to preserve footer when performing
> >buffer overflows, ...
> 
> This isn't on the wiki...?

Indeed, the items that aren't yet there should be added to Open
Issues, and a new Roadmap section for post-1.0 work should be added.
I'll try to get to that soon.

Rich