bug-gnulib
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FYI: removing HAVE_FCNTL_H tests


From: Jim Meyering
Subject: Re: FYI: removing HAVE_FCNTL_H tests
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:45:51 +0200

Bruno Haible <address@hidden> wrote:
> Jim Meyering wrote:
>> > I've just removed all tests for HAVE_FCNTL_H from coreutils.
>> > It's been gone in at least one place since coreutils-5.0 (2004-04-02)

[actually, that should have been 2003-04-02, not 2004]

>> The same applies to HAVE_UNISTD_H and unistd.h
>
> One platform still does not have <unistd.h>: It's Woe32 with the MSVC
> compiler. It's unfortunately a major platform, and still alive.

Perhaps it's not a popular enough build environment for packages using
gnulib.  Several existing modules include <unistd.h> unconditionally:

  lib/argp-parse.c
  lib/chdir-long.c
  lib/fts.c
  lib/getpass.c
  lib/openat.c
  lib/poll.c
  lib/utime.c

and yet I haven't heard any complaints.

> Also, <unistd.h> is less dependable for GNU programs than <fcntl.h>,
> because someone creates a brand new operating system different in style
> from Unix, he will typically implement the ISO C headers but not POSIX
> <unistd.h>. (Some recent operating systems like BeOS or MacOS X have
> a Unix underneath, but others don't.)

IMHO, a new OS that does not provide a POSIX header like <unistd.h>
does not deserve our consideration -- and isn't likely to get much
from any other development community, either.

> So for the sake of ease of porting to new OSes, I would leave HAVE_UNISTD_H
> in place.

Thanks for the info.
I've made a note to wait a year.
If there have still been no complaints,
I'll remove them then.




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]