RE: Use of _XOPEN_SOURCE?

["Howland Craig D (Craig)" <howland at LGSInnovations dot com>]

I will prepare a patch, possibly tonight.  (I wanted to do a little
direct checking into older POSIX before blindly following the GLIBC
approach.)
Craig 

-----Original Message-----
From: newlib-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:newlib-owner@sourceware.org]
On Behalf Of Corinna Vinschen
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 11:49 AM
To: newlib@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: Use of _XOPEN_SOURCE?

On Mar 16 11:32, Howland Craig D (Craig) wrote:
> On March 16, 2010 11:29 AM, Corinna wrote:
> > The GLibc headers OTOH definitely allow it:
> > 
> >   #if (_XOPEN_SOURCE - 0) >= 700
> >     ...
> That's a good trick:  we can use that to get around the problem.

Indeed.  But that's not the entire problem.  What does

  #define _XOPEN_SOURCE

mean?  GLibc maps it to 

 #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 2

nd it also covers the case that _XOPEN_SOURCE is set to 500 by
setting _POSIX_C_SOURCE to 199506L (that's SUSv2 right?)

We should do the same, perhaps.  WOuld you mind to prepare a patch?


Thanks,
Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Project Co-Leader
Red Hat