This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Remove PRI_MACROS_BROKEN define usage
- From: Adhemerval Zanella <azanella at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: "GNU C. Library" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 15:45:36 -0300
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove PRI_MACROS_BROKEN define usage
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <532B3168 dot 2030108 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1403201832040 dot 29670 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
On 20-03-2014 15:35, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Mar 2014, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>
>> 2014-03-20 Adhemerval Zanella <azanella@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>
>> * intl/loadmsgcat.c (PRI_MACROS_BROKEN): Remove unused conditional.
> I think this file comes from GNU gettext (though we're long out of sync
> with gettext's copy of libintl - still, coordinating with gettext on how
> to avoid -Wundef warnings might be a good idea, as we'd like to end up
> with identical sources for shared files). Defining PRI_MACROS_BROKEN to 0
> if _LIBC would be a conservative approach to keeping down divergence, if
> PRI_MACROS_BROKEN is still considered relevant in the gettext context.
>
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gettext.git/tree/gettext-runtime/intl/loadmsgcat.c
>
Do we still want to keep code that no longer makes sense in our context? GLIBC does
not even have configure check for PRI_MACROS_BROKEN, so should we keep aiming
a possible sync? I personally aim for simplicity and maintainability in this
case, which means get rid of legacy code that does not make sense for GLIBC.