Date:	Mon, 26 Jun 2000 17:11:32 -0400
Message-Id:	<200006262111.RAA02148@envy.delorie.com>
From:	DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<3957BF10.7EBB2B8D@softhome.net> (message from Laurynas Biveinis
	on Mon, 26 Jun 2000 22:37:36 +0200)
Subject:	Re: Patch: chown() preparation for symlinks
References:	<395643BB DOT 7109B0DA AT softhome DOT net> <200006261453 DOT KAA11494 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <3957BF10 DOT 7EBB2B8D AT softhome DOT net>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> assumption wrong? Or is it general policy to #include <libc/stubs.h>
> everywhere in libc sources to play safe?

I've got a program (or had, when I was working under MS-DOS) that
checked libc.a for "cleanness".  It told me when I needed stubs.h and
when I didn't.  If you can get that program working again (um,
tests/libclink/check.cc and friends) then it will tell you when you
need it and when you don't.

Otherwise, it's a good idea to include it.

- Raw text -