This is the mail archive of the
newlib@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the newlib project.
Re: the remaining chunk of the RTEMS patch
- To: Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at OARcorp dot com>, Christopher Faylor <cgf at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: the remaining chunk of the RTEMS patch
- From: Corinna Vinschen <vinschen at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 15:34:01 +0100
- Cc: "J. Johnston" <jjohnstn at cygnus dot com>, newlib at sources dot redhat dot com, cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- References: <3A27C288.6DF46BC1@OARcorp.com> <20001211215642.A20269@redhat.com> <3A3621D4.9DDB0069@OARcorp.com>
On Tuesday 12 December 2000 14:02, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > AFAICT, it removes things like '_SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF' and
> > '_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN'. It also seems to renumber other SC_
> > constants from their previous usage, which breaks backwards
> > compatibility.
>
> Where were these? I thought I did not remove any. :(
As usual: libc/include/sys/unistd.h
> Also AFAIK aren't these beyond POSIX?
So they have to be removed?
> As I have stated other times, RTEMS does not particularly care about
> the numeric values. Feel free to change them to whatever Cygwin
> wants.
I'm somewhat annoyed by this statement. Why didn't you care
for the values when creating the patch? I'm not quite convinced
that other people have to repair the damage but you.
> Please feel free to change the value of constants. RTEMS does not
> depend
> on these in any fashion. :)
Then, why did you change the existing values?
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Developer
Red Hat, Inc.
mailto:vinschen@redhat.com