"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com> writes:

> Tim Rightnour writes:
> > I guess I don't understand why we don't define "unix".  Alot of third party
> > stuff relies on the fact that most unix or unix-like machines define that
> > automaticly.
> 
> This is, according to modern standards, incorrect behavior. CPP is not 
> allowed to pollute the user namespace that way.

Considering that the NetBSD environment, in its current state, does
not fulfil the UNIX(r) Base Branding requirements, having cpp indicate
that it's running in a UNIX environment is just wrong.  (The fact that
the current UNIX specification does not permit this kind of name space
pollution is just another argument against adding it to NetBSD/alpha's
GCC configuration but for removing it from those configs that define
it.)