Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xenpaging: remove _XOPEN_SOURCE

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Roger Pau Monnà writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xenpaging: remove 
_XOPEN_SOURCE"):
> Olaf Hering acked the patch with the condition that I add the error
> message, since you didn't say anything I through you where fine with
> that. Should I send the patch with _NETBSD_SOURCE instead?

Did you not see my message, copy below ?

Thanks,
Ian.

From: Ian Jackson <iwj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Roger Pau Monnï <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>,
    "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
    Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenpaging: remove XOPEN_SOURCE
Message-ID: <20199.26338.308105.913566@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 14:53:22 +0000

Roger Pau Monnï writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenpaging: remove 
XOPEN_SOURCE"):
> 2011/12/13 Laszlo Ersek <lersek@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> > The stuff made visible by _GNU_SOURCE (with glibc) includes everything
> > _XOPEN_SOURCE makes visible [3]. [4] introduced it because of asprintf().
> 
> If it's not necessary I think it's best to remove the definition, to
> avoid having a lot of useless defines all over the code.

I disagree.  The purpose of these kind of macros is purely to allow
systems to claim standards-compliance and absence of namespace
pollution, by default.

The logical conclusion is that these kind of problems should be fixed
by adding more requests for platform-specific features, not removing
them.

In this case that would mean adding:
 #define _NETBSD_SOURCE

If the prevalance of these kind of macros is getting irritating they
can easily be moved into a common header file somewhere.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel