Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:52:47 -0500 (EST)
From:      Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
To:        Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru>
Cc:        freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: standards/63173: Patch to add getopt_long_only(3) to libc
Message-ID:  <200402230352.i1N3qluf062405@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20040223033628.GA41038@nagual.pp.ru>
References:  <200402221620.i1MGKBRH001589@freefall.freebsd.org> <200402230237.i1N2bffP061911@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20040223033628.GA41038@nagual.pp.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 06:36:29 +0300, Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru> said:

> The question is really about 3rd party non-standard headers, like GNU 
> ones. I.e. Should we protect all contents there with __XSI_VISIBLE, 
> __POSIX_VISIBLE too or not?

An application including a non-POSIX (or non-ISO) header has no
expectation of receiving a POSIX (ISO) namespace.

-GAWollman



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200402230352.i1N3qluf062405>