On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 11:22:45AM +0100, Måns Rullgård wrote:
> Diego Biurrun <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > On some (BSD) systems _POSIX_C_SOURCE masks function definitions in
> > system header files.  Avoid the #define in that case.
> > This allows eliminating some BSD-specific hacks.
> > ---
> >  configure        |    5 ++++-
> >  doc/general.texi |    8 --------
> >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/configure b/configure
> > index 2b5aeab..db67466 100755
> > --- a/configure
> > +++ b/configure
> > @@ -2310,7 +2310,10 @@ if test "$?" != 0; then
> >      die "C compiler test failed."
> >  fi
> >  
> > -add_cppflags -D_ISOC99_SOURCE -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=200112
> > +add_cppflags -D_ISOC99_SOURCE
> > +check_func_headers unistd.h lockf -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=200112 &&
> > +    ! check_func_headers unistd.h lockf &&
> > +    add_cppflags -D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=200112
> 
> This looks weird.

Forget about it, it won't work anyway as it is missing another
-D_XOPEN_SOURCE=500 flag.

I think we should first agree what the desired semantics are.
We need a test that succeeds with the posix flag and, well, what 
else exactly?  If the function is not available at all, what should
be the fallback behavior?  Do we want the POSIX flag added or not?

Also, should the test succeed w/ and w/o the posix flag or only w/
the flag or what?

Diego
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to