[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20121020165013.c849d997.idunham@lavabit.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 16:50:13 -0700
From: Isaac Dunham <idunham@...abit.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Add basic sys/cdefs.h found on most unix
On Sun, 21 Oct 2012 01:38:52 +0200
Abdoulaye Walsimou GAYE <awg@...toolkit.org> wrote:
> On 10/21/2012 01:18 AM, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> > On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 22:15:43 +0200
> > Abdoulaye Walsimou Gaye <awg@...toolkit.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Signed-off-by: Abdoulaye Walsimou Gaye <awg@...toolkit.org>
> >> ---
> >> include/sys/cdefs.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >> create mode 100644 include/sys/cdefs.h
> > I'm pretty sure that the last three times sys/cdefs.h was proposed, it was rejected.
> Unfortunately many packages (wrongly?) use to rely on macros defined there,
> sometimes indirectly via <features.h>.
Yes, but that wasn't enough of a reason the last three times.
It isn't standard (-> not universal/portable), is very easily replaced, and even if it is added for compatability, it should not be used internally.
I would say that the last point is the most important.
Isaac Dunham <idunham@...abit.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
