This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH][BZ 18234] struct stat is not posix conform


On 20/05/15 17:44, Joseph Myers wrote:
> Most widely-used cases use __USE_XOPEN2K8.  The exceptions are: toplevel 
> bits/stat.h (not used in fact) doesn't have the timespec members; 
> sysdeps/nacl/bits/stat.h uses __USE_MISC || __USE_XOPEN2K8; as discussed, 
> linux/generic uses __USE_MISC; linux/ia64 uses __USE_MISC; 
> linux/microblaze uses __USE_MISC.
> 
> So, I think a change to use just __USE_XOPEN2K8 is most appropriate.  This 
> would fix bugs with the elements not being made available when they should 
> be.  The default API level includes __USE_XOPEN2K8.  If __USE_MISC is 
> defined, so is __USE_XOPEN2K8: __USE_MISC is only defined when 
> _DEFAULT_SOURCE is defined (explicitly or implicitly), and _DEFAULT_SOURCE 
> implies __USE_XOPEN2K8.  So __USE_MISC || __USE_XOPEN2K8 is entirely 
> redundant and means the same as __USE_XOPEN2K8.
> 
> Thus: fix nacl, linux/generic, linux/ia64 and linux/microblaze to use 
> __USE_XOPEN2K8 here (all in one patch, and the bug in Bugzilla might 
> reasonably be rescoped to cover all those cases).
> 

ok,

i guess it's ok for consistency if i fix struct stat64
too to use __USE_XOPEN2K8.

i will run some tests and come back with a patch

> linux/alpha does its own more complicated thing with a macro __ST_TIME; I 
> see no real reason for one architecture to do things differently from all 
> the test, but also no reason to change it for this bug since it's already 
> using __USE_XOPEN2K8.
> 
> -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com
> 


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]