Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 15:09:41 -0400 From: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.org> To: Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@mail.ru> Cc: Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz> Subject: Re: same define in two header files Message-ID: <20030504150940.D55150@espresso.bsdmike.org> In-Reply-To: <20030504145210.74ea557d.kabaev@mail.ru>; from kabaev@mail.ru on Sun, May 04, 2003 at 02:52:10PM -0400 References: <1052068880.617.9.camel@pav.oook.cz> <20030504145210.74ea557d.kabaev@mail.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@mail.ru> writes: > On 04 May 2003 19:21:21 +0200 > Pav Lucistnik <pav@oook.cz> wrote: > > Maybe there are stalled header files in /usr/include, how can I found > > which one? I can't rely on timestamps like with binaries. > > > No, this was a pollution I incorrectly propagated from non-i386 > platforms. I will commit a fix shortly. I guess this means you're going to remove DBL_* and FLT_*? If so, I agree there's no reason why we should define duplicate constants in a non-standard location. Also, the namespace check for LONG_BIT and WORD_BIT is very dated and forgets about any standards written in the last decade or so. A more appropriate check would be #ifndef __BSD_VISIBLE (after including <sys/cdefs.h>). Best regards, Mike Barcroft
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030504150940.D55150>