Marc Recht <marc@informatik.uni-bremen.de> writes: > The clean way on FreeBSD is then _not_ to define the above defines. We > then get everything we want. > If you define _POSIX_C_SOURCE you get _POSIX_C_SOURCE. Not more, not > less.. Can you elaborate? We also define _XOPEN_SOURCE. So we are entitled to get all functions defined for UNIX. I consider it a bug that FreeBSD does not provide a mode for "Conforming XSI Application Using Extensions", according to http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/basedefs/xbd_chap02.html > Setting __BSD_VISIBLE is rather a hack and shouldn't be done.. If it is a hack to work around a bug in FreeBSD, then I think it is acceptable. > Please have a look at the patch, which I submitted on SourceForge. It is way too large to be acceptable, and takes a "I care only about one system" position. Try writing your code in a way so that it simultaneously works with many systems, instead of special-casing each system individually. For example, why is it necessary to move the enable-framework processing? Regards, Martin
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4