>Date: Wed, 19 Apr 1995 22:26:02 +0100 (BST)
>From: David Brownlee <D.K.Brownlee@city.ac.uk>

>	I specifically didn't mention _POSIX_SOURCE :)
>
>	I think the need is for something _more_ than just posix - hence
>	the BSD extensions :)

OK then, which "legacy" features do you think should be masked out?
What is in the headers now that is neither POSIX nor a BSD extension?

NetBSD could become like HPUX 9, which defines a whole raft of
_XXX_SOURCE macros for various namespaces.  See stdsyms(5) if you have
access to an HPUX 9+ system.

>	(I remember the last time I tried to compile something under strict
>	posix under SCO... "Wait a minute.. Where the Hell is everything?!!"

That's the price you pay for portability.
-- 
Mike Long <mike.long@analog.com>       PGP 2.6.2 public key signature:
VLSI Design Engineer                  CCBF225E7D3F7ECB2C8F7ABB15D9BE7B
Analog Devices, CPD Division   "Get a life" -- Prosecutor Marcia Clark
Norwood, MA 02062 USA                assert(*this!=opinionof(Analog));