Andrew Doran wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2007 at 01:11:00AM +0200, Elad Efrat wrote:
> 
>> Andrew Doran wrote:
>>
>>> Is there a problem with making this a runtime tunable instead of yet another
>>> option?
>> It is already a runtime tunable, under the security.pax.aslr node.
> 
> Ok. I object to the addition of the unnecessary ifdefs and associated
> baggage, and I'd like to see them removed. Especially since this change
> has, basically, no overhead when not enabled.

We hold the same position. You may want to check the PaX features thread
on tech-security@ from ~exactly 2 years ago. :)

	http://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-security/2005/12/

Is it okay if we give this some time until others get a chance to catch
up on email (holidays?) and reply as well?

-e.