On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Mark Kettenis <[email protected]> wrote:
>> From: [email protected] (=?utf-8?Q?J=C3=A9r=C3=A9mie_Courr=C3=A8ges-Anglas?=)
>> Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 18:02:37 +0100
>>
>> A few months ago, I spotted warnings in a port, related to the decl of
>> one of those functions not being reachable.
>>
>> This went in a bulk (still a few months ago, thanks to landry@) with no
>> fallout.
>>
>> Does this look fine?
>
> ok kettenis@
The __BSD_VISIBLE test can be left out**, and the preference seems to
be to put POSIX before XPG in the lines, so I suggest:
#if __POSIX_VISIBLE >= 200112L || __XPG_VISIBLE >= 420
otherwise, ok guenther@
(Took me a while to conclude that 200112 is the correct POSIX tag;
199506 had fchmod...but only if you had certain real-time features!)
** it would only help someone building with something like "cc
-D_POSIX_C_SOURCE=199506 -D_BSD_SOURCE=1" which, IMHO, is insane.
