On Mon, 12 Aug 2002, Martin Weber wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 05:48:05PM +0100, Ben Harris wrote:
> > [... Name clashes of utils in libc headers with own stuff ...]
> >
> > One way to avoid this is to #define a feature-test macro like _POSIX_SOURCE.
> > That will prevent the include files defining anything that the relevant
> > standard doesn't permit.  This might be a little too restrictive for you,
> > though.
>
> Could also do it the solaris way, #define _EXTENSIONS :) (or was it EXTENSIONS?)
> (i.e. leave the utils like fparseln etc. out of the corresponding
> headers if EXTENSIONS is not defined in the including code environment)

So what do you get if you don't define _EXTENSIONS?  Is it 4.3BSD, 4.4BSD,
IEEE Std 1003.1-1988, IEEE Std 1003.1-1990, ISO/IEC 9945-1:1996
IEEE Std 1003.1-2001, XPG1, XPG2, XPG3, XPG4, XPG5, XPG6, or something
else entirely?  And having chosen, are we allowed to change the base when
a new standard comes out?

-- 
Ben Harris                                                   <bjh21@netbsd.org>
Portmaster, NetBSD/acorn26           <URL:http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/acorn26/>