Re: Snake farm

> Could you please call it __EXTENSIONS__? Many of the functions that
> fall under it are not BSD specific, and _BSD_SOURCE selects the
> favour-bsd API on other systems. 
The responsible person seems to be against a solution like this. But, in
the discussion it turns out that you are right and there some bugs in
FreeBSD's unistd.h. The fixes will (probably) committed today. But 
there are some issues left mostly in the RPC and socket code, which need
__BSD_VISIBLE. Some problems are left, because some functions (like
ftello) are only defined at a higher POSIX level.
 
> out support for a number of such systems. It's just not worth the
> pain. Python works on Posix systems, and uses extensions where
> available. It does not work on strange systems; tough luck for users
> of such systems (we have yet to hear from a DYNIX user who wants to
> run Python 2.2).
I'm not talking about strange systems. Although I've not tested it
BSD/OS comes to mind or NetBSD/OpenBSD. 

> > > Only if all other options have been exhausted. What problems occur if
> > > _XOPEN_SOURCE is defined?
> > _XOPEN_SOURCE sets _POSIX_C_SOURCE.
> 
> And why is that a problem?
In that case __BSD_VISIBLE is not set.

Regards,
Marc
-- 
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." -- Donald E. Knuth

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQA9z+O+7YQCetAaG3MRAgQfAJ9bFfnsCsua/VCrJwUUsL+Ysw7v5gCggav9
B7m5cmBNKED5UK+uGarc0Kg=
=Fyum
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----