From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 22 19:52:49 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9750B16A4CE for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:52:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56E8D43D1D for ; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 19:52:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu) Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (localhost.nic.fr [IPv6:::1]) by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i1N3qlDa062408 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK CN=khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu issuer=SSL+20Client+20CA); Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:52:48 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu) Received: (from wollman@localhost) by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i1N3qluf062405; Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:52:47 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from wollman) Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2004 22:52:47 -0500 (EST) From: Garrett Wollman Message-Id: <200402230352.i1N3qluf062405@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> To: Andrey Chernov 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> X-Spam-Score: -19.8 () IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.37 cc: freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: standards/63173: Patch to add getopt_long_only(3) to libc X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 03:52:49 -0000 < 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