The following reply was made to PR pkg/47322; it has been noted by GNATS.
No response for quite awhile, so I'll reiterate with an extract of the
link provided:
> But, if GCC decides to use TLS canary for -fstack-protector,
> then it ought to avoid -lssp_nonshared -lssp, while if
> it decides not to use them, then it should force -lssp_nonshared -lssp
> (as glibc doesn't provide __stack_chk_guard on the architectures
> that provide TLS canary).
In absence of any pertinent objections, I'll push this with the builtin
mit-krb5 gssapi fixes affecting cups this weekend or so.
BTW - I don't believe suppressing the 'LDFLAGS+= -lssp_nonshared' in
favour of 'CFLAGS+= -fno-stack-protector' is necessarily a great
alternative... That is, unless there are some great arguments for this
approach.