Re: POSIX-2024 and dirent.h

On Aug 15 17:04, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Aug 14 21:45, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Aug 14 13:53, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> > > Hi
> > > 
> > > POSIX Issue 8 (2024) adds the following to dirent.h:
> > > 
> > > DT_BLK, DT_CHR, DT_DIR, DT_FIFO, DT_LNK, DT_REG, DT_SOCK, DT_UNKNOWN,
> > > DT_MQ, DT_SEM, DT_SHM, and DT_TMO
> > > 
> > > These were not mentioned in POSIX Issue 7 (2018).
> > > 
> > > The default dirent.h and sys/dirent.h do not support anything. I only see
> > > the DT_ constants in the sys/rtems version.
> > > 
> > > The sys/rtems version has the constants inside a __BSD_VISIBLE guard.
> > > 
> > > I think these should also be under a (_POSIX_C_SOURCE >= 202405L) guard.
> > > 
> > > I am looking for concurrence and whether adding a check for 202405L has any
> > > impact on sys/features.h. POSIX-2018 (Issue 7) still specifies
> > > using 200809L for _POSIX_C_SOURCE.
> > 
> > Yes, this should be added to sys/features.h with a matching __POSIX_VISIBLE
> > which in turn should be used in the affected headers.  _GNU_SOURCE and
> > _DEFAULT_SOURCE should set _POSIX_C_SOURCE to 202405L. _XOPEN_SOURCE is
> > unaffected.
> 
> There's an interesting twist.
> 
> Even the latest sources of GLibC define _POSIX_C_SOURCE to 200809L if
> _GNU_SOURCE has been defined.
> 
> It's a good question what to do with _POSIX_C_SOURCE in this case.
> 
> - Compatibility with _GNU_SOURCE upstream means to keep _POSIX_C_SOURCE
> at 200809L.
> 
> - But GLibC just didn't have to change features.h because none of the
>   new interfaces is available in their headers yet.

On second glance it appears that just nobody worked on it yet...

>   And _GNU_SOURCE
>   usually translates as "everything amd the kitchen sink".  That would
>   speak for going forward and bump _POSIX_C_SOURCE to 202405L.
> 
> Personally I'd go for the second option.  Any strong reservations?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Corinna