From owner-freebsd-current Wed Jul 24 01:28:46 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA01422 for current-outgoing; Wed, 24 Jul 1996 01:28:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA01387 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 1996 01:28:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id SAA16182; Wed, 24 Jul 1996 18:11:17 +1000 Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 18:11:17 +1000 From: Bruce Evans Message-Id: <199607240811.SAA16182@godzilla.zeta.org.au> To: current@freebsd.org, nnd@itfs.nsk.su Subject: Re: Current , and POSIX (?) Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >I was told (in qmail-beta mailing list) that by POSIX >it is not necessary to include to use >. >Could someone POSIXly-impaired (:-) confirm that ? No, POSIX.1 section 4.1.2.1 requires to be included before , even though the interfaces defined in don't depend explictly on any of the types declared in (most POSIX interfaces do depend on these types so the requirement for is obvious). The old BSD happened not to depend on any of the types in . This changed in BSD4.4Lite2. >BTW, in NetBSD-current(?) contains >#include just before #include I think NetBSD attempts to conform to X/OPEN and X/OPEN does require it. FreeBSD's doesn't conform to POSIX anyway. Even if _POSIX_SOURCE is defined, it #defines many application identifiers: DTTOIF, DT_BLK, many other DT_'s, IFTODT. Only application identifiers beginning with d_ or ending with _t are reserved for (they shall not be declared or defined for the application). FreeBSD's also fails to confrom to POSIX. Even if _POSIX_SOURCE is defined, it #defines many application identifiers: BIG_ENDIAN, BYTE_ORDER, HTONL, HTONS, LITTLE_ENDIAN NTOHL, NTOHS, PDP_ENDIAN, htonl, htons, ntohl, ntohs. and it declares one system identifier that doesn't belong here: lseek. Bruce