Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 06:36:29 +0300 From: Andrey Chernov <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Cc: Marius Strobl <marius@alchemy.franken.de> Subject: Re: standards/63173: Patch to add getopt_long_only(3) to libc Message-ID: <20040223033628.GA41038@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <200402230237.i1N2bffP061911@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> References: <200402221620.i1MGKBRH001589@freefall.freebsd.org> <200402230237.i1N2bffP061911@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 09:37:41PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote: > > The intention of the way it's done in OpenBSD and the patch is to > > declare getopt(3) etc. unconditionally as done by the GNU getopt.h and > > not in specific namespaces (like __XSI_VISIBLE etc.). > > If it's not declared the same way in the same place in every version > of POSIX ever promulgated, then it needs to be in the appropriate > namespace. 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? -- Andrey Chernov | http://ache.pp.ru/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040223033628.GA41038>