Konstantin Andreev <andreev@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I have heard that 'string.h' and 'strings.h' are incompatible on some > systems, and including both may causes problems. So, if I include only > one of them, I increase portability. You're well beyond the 10 year portability time horizon here and heading fast for 20-year-obsolete OSes when worrying about anything related to strings.h. Even with that vintage of system, SunOS would handle co-inclusion of both headers just fine, and it was the primary system that required strings.h. Including both has also been recommended in the Autoconf manual for a long, long time. I think any system that has problems with including both is going to be pretty amazingly obscure. Practically speaking, I suspect that you'll improve portability to systems that people actually care about by not worrying about strings.h at all and not even trying to include it. I think we've now reached the point where it's more likely that an OS will provide a broken strings.h out of a misguided sense of backwards compatibility than that someone will really want to build new software on SunOS. -- Russ Allbery (rra@xxxxxxxxxxxx) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
