Re: Host requirements to build the Tools binaries

At Sun, 01 Sep 2024 11:57:47 +1200, Lloyd Parkes <[email protected]> wrote:
Subject: Re: Host requirements to build the Tools binaries
> 
> On Thu, 2024-08-29 at 16:53 +0200, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> > I will of course happily to test builds in any direction, but in
> > which direction do we want to proceed? Just do a few small patches to
> > avoid those functions that aren't declared easily? Update the stuff
> > that needs further updates and go for -D_GNU_SOURCE?
> 
> I do not believe that it is right to use -D_GNU_SOURCE because we
> aren't writing GNU software. The definitions I added seem to be what
> GNU/Linux documents and they seem to work if you want to get the
> current code working with GCC 14. kre has raised an important issue
> with this approach though, and I'll discuss that in a separate email.

Some NetBSD tools _are_ GNU Software.  To me that means their source
should define _GNU_SOURCE by definition and by default, but if they
don't then NetBSD _MUST_ do it for them when building on a GNU or
GNU-like platform.

-- 
					Greg A. Woods <[email protected]>

Kelowna, BC     +1 250 762-7675           RoboHack <[email protected]>
Planix, Inc. <[email protected]>     Avoncote Farms <[email protected]>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EABECAB0WIQRuK6dmwVAucmRxuh9mfXG3eL/0fwUCZtXceAAKCRBmfXG3eL/0
f3j0AKCguiE7ESL7EoflEyAUkbcEUyIEugCg8jymbHN1ymWJOVj9/GQdu8+9yMs=
=2s+c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----