Re: Re: [UnixOS2] libc

On Sat, Jul 12, 2003 at 03:47:08PM +0200, Andreas Buening wrote:
> - Which macros do we want support to control the header files?
>   I mean things like _POSIX_SOURCE, _LARGEFILE_SOURCE, _ISO_XXX
>   and _EMX_OLD_API versus _EMX_NEW_API (or whatever).

I propose to use descriptive macros, as in _EMX_OFF_T_IS_64BIT etc.
If one discovers a way to use different macro names so that existing
./configure autodetection works, one can "mirror" these
configure-recognized names to the descriptive ones.

> - Which new features/functions do we want to add directly into
>   the emx import libraries and which ones do we want to put
>   into seperate import libraries (e.g. regex to avoid name clashes)?

I would think that by default everything goes to c.lib.  If somebody
on the list recognizes a conflict, then the question makes sense.

Until this we should not spend time on such discussions.  (Until a
giant merge, such as one with posix2, happens; but given that the
proponents of this merge are not ready to discuss *what exactly* they
want to merge, I do not think this is going to be on the agenda soon.
;-)

> - When do we want to start?

I will not be able to merge my "async processes after pid wrap" patch
until mid-september (left the build tree in different hemisphere
without taking diff ;-[).  But there is plenty of stuff to do anyway...

Any reason for delay?

Ilya