On Sun, 8 Jun 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Honestly, I'd have to say that such platform header files are buggy ;-) I agree, but getting various things changed is near impossible. Especially since they are either in a retired or unmaintained state. Although a few are still release updated products, they refuse to change them citeing backword compatibility. > If they want to use u_short and other custom types for their internal use, > that is understandable and perfectly fine, and if they want to hide these > names when _POSIX or _XOPEN is defined because you are not supposed to > contaminate the namespace, that is also sensible, but at the same time you > (not you, Boyd, but whoever developed the system header files) should have > taken an alternate measure (perhaps by using __u_short or something) not > to break the features they declare in the other header files of their own. I agree +1 > And not defining _XOPEN nor _POSIX would be a reasonable workaround to > the problem on such systems. Agreed. Thanks, -- Boyd Gerber <gerberb@xxxxxxxxx> ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
