[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer
From: |
Paul Eggert |
Subject: |
Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer |
Date: |
Wed, 02 Aug 2006 00:37:29 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
Eric Blake <address@hidden> writes:
> Should the extensions module be extended to check for and define
> _POSIX_SOURCE, to coax the compiler into admitting that fdopen
> exists?
I'd be inclined to say "no". Defining _POSIX_SOURCE tends to cause
more problems than it cures, because it can disable useful extensions.
For example, with Solaris 10 /usr/ucb/cc, it disables SA_RESTART
in <signal.h>.
Instead, we should advise users not to use /usr/ucb/cc on
Solaris. I know of no reason to use that compiler (other than to
generate bogus bug reports :-). Anybody who has a working /usr/ucb/cc
in a Solaris setup has a working C compiler in some other location
(typically /opt/SUNWspro/bin/cc) and should simply use that compiler.
Perhaps we could write a gnulib module that detects the mistake of
someone attempting to use /usr/ucb/cc on Solaris.
> Also, why is extensions.m4 doing this? Should it be using #ifdef instead?
> #ifndef __EXTENSIONS__
> # undef __EXTENSIONS__
> #endif
No, that's just the template. The undef gets replaced by a define, if
__EXTENSIONS__ is needed. It gets left alone otherwise, so it's a
noop in that case.
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- Re: split stdio-safer into fopen-safer, tmpfile-safer,
Paul Eggert <=