X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org From: "Dave Korn" To: Subject: RE: Define _POSIX_SOURCE in cygwin's features.h? Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:40:35 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20060112173104.GA30011@trixie.casa.cgf.cx> Message-ID: Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Christopher Faylor wrote: > Someone on the cygwin irc channel had a problem building a package which > would have been solved if Cygwin defined _POSIX_SOURCE. > > I know that Cygwin is not fully POSIX compliant (I really really do) but > I'm wondering if setting _POSIX_SOURCE in the cygwin headers wouldn't > solve more porting problems than it creates. > > Any opinions on this? Eric? > > cgf > > P.S. I know that Cygwin isn't fully compliant with POSIX specifications. As far as I can tell by googling, _POSIX_SOURCE, despite the leading underscore, is in fact a user-land feature test macro that it is up to each individual application to decide whether to switch it on or not according to whether the application itself is compliant or not. IOW, the system headers should have nothing to say about it at all, although they may well want to react to it if it is defined at the time they are #included. cheers, DaveK -- Can't think of a witty .sigline today.... -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/