Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2002 22:25:28 +1000 From: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> To: Gianmarco Giovannelli <gmarco@giovannelli.it> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: recursive include, why FreeBSD not ? Message-ID: <20020818122528.GD785@k7.mavetju> In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20020818112527.0178a268@194.184.65.4> References: <5.1.1.6.2.20020818112527.0178a268@194.184.65.4>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Aug 18, 2002 at 11:32:47AM +0200, Gianmarco Giovannelli wrote:
> I have a piece of code like this:
>
> #if defined(__OpenBSD__)
> #define __BYTE_ORDER BYTE_ORDER
> #define __LITTLE_ENDIAN LITTLE_ENDIAN
> #define __BIG_ENDIAN BIG_ENDIAN
> #endif
>
> [...]
>
> #if defined(__FreeBSD__)
> #include <sys/types.h>
> #define __BYTE_ORDER BYTE_ORDER
> #define __LITTLE_ENDIAN LITTLE_ENDIAN
> #define __BIG_ENDIAN BIG_ENDIAN
> #endif
>
>
> If I remove the:
> #include <sys/types.h>
> it doesn't compile while OpenBSD and Linux compile clean...
Linux has the obsession of including include-files in the include
files itself. For example, sys/socket.h includes sys/types.h(*)
FreeBSD doesn't include that sys/types.h in sys/socket.h, therefor
it will fail to compile.
I don't know who is right, but if the man-page tells me to include
sys/types.h and sys/socket.h I will do it that way and not the other
way around and neither only sys/socket.h.
(*) It might (or might not) be sys/types.h and sys/socket.h, but
that is the one which I think it was. I have had the same
experience a couple of times before.
Edwin
--
Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.MavEtJu.org
edwin@mavetju.org | Weblog: http://www.mavetju.org/weblog/weblog.php
bash$ :(){ :|:&};: | Interested in MUDs? http://www.FatalDimensions.org/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020818122528.GD785>