Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 23:33:57 -0500 From: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> To: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: <sys/select.h> depends on <sys/types.h>...? Message-ID: <41EDE335.1000704@mac.com> In-Reply-To: <41EDD190.4010509@gmx.net> References: <0C3AB98B-69AD-11D9-B776-003065ABFD92@mac.com> <20050119012809.GA62189@xor.obsecurity.org> <41EDCBA1.4030909@mac.com> <41EDD190.4010509@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael Nottebrock wrote: > Chuck Swiger wrote: [ ... ] >> OK, although note that MacOS X compiles foo.cxx without changes-- >> sys/select.h will pull in what it needs to work on that platform: > > IIRC, FreeBSD 5.x doesn't need the extra <sys/types.h> include either. > AFAIK, it's not so a much wrong-or-right issue (SUSv2 or similar > standards don't require sys/select.h to setup the types it needs), but > just a change of conventions (not having to include sys/types.h to make > sys/select.h work is certainly convenient). OK, thanks for the additional thoughts. I'm happy to see system header files move in a direction that facilitates use-- ie, they know what they depend on and ensure that what they need gets pulled in. After all, if people are going to spend the time & effort to make system header files...erm, idempotent?, then one might as well take advantage of that and of any compiler support available (precompiled headers). > If you go back a few linux kernel/solaris/macosx releases, you'd > probably find the extra include requirement there, too. Sure. Only, if an earlier version of Linux 2.2 or OS X needed sys/types.h to use sys/select.h, then wouldn't the BZFlag sources know to use it by now...? :-) -- -Chuck
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?41EDE335.1000704>