[Python-Dev] Snake farm
10 Nov 2002 23:31:35 +0100
> Can you elaborate? We also define _XOPEN_SOURCE. So we are entitled to
> get all functions defined for UNIX.
Hmm.. I'm not that standards guy and didn't read that out of that
document. It enable the extensions. (Though I'm not that sure which that
> I consider it a bug that FreeBSD does not provide a mode for
> "Conforming XSI Application Using Extensions", according to
FreeBSD does support that. _XOPEN_SOURCE =3D 500 means:
#define __XSI_VISIBLE 500
#define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 199506
> > Setting __BSD_VISIBLE is rather a hack and shouldn't be done..
> If it is a hack to work around a bug in FreeBSD, then I think it is
I still not think that's a bug in FreeBSD. But I send you sys/cdefs.h
and unistd.h, so you can have a look for yourself. Maybe I'm getting
something wrong here. IMO it's just a strict interpretation of the
> It is way too large to be acceptable, and takes a "I care only about =09
Why? There are only two actual changes the case for FreeBSD and the
addition of _THREAD_SAFE to the CFLAGS if Python is compiled with
threads. The rest just moves the MACHDEP stuff to the top of
> one system" position. Try writing your code in a way so that it
I don't think so.. Sometimes systems need special treatment...
> simultaneously works with many systems, instead of special-casing each
> system individually.
I didn't saw an other way to do it. The defines were always set and that
just doesn't work for FreeBSD.
> For example, why is it necessary to move the enable-framework
To define MACHDEP before the XOPEN/POSIX stuff, because of the FreeBSD
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil." -- Donald E. Knuth
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----