On Wednesday 07 May 2008 02:40:13 am Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * John Baldwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080505 13:47] wrote: > > On Monday 05 May 2008 03:24:17 pm Peter Jeremy wrote: > > > On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 02:59:28PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > > > >On Monday 05 May 2008 02:40:03 pm Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > > >> I'm _not_ objecting, just interested in why. > > > >> > > > >> Any references to discussions on this? Are we now safe for > > > >> future compat or something? > > > > > > > >Having FILE be opaque broke just about every 'configure' script on the > > > >planet. :( > > > > > > Either autoconf and friends are _intended_ as impediments to > > > portability or they are completely broken by design. > > > > It appears that autoconf only believes a type is real if you can typedef it to > > another type, cast 0 to a valid pointer to the new typedef'd type, and do a > > sizeof() of the typdef'd type. The last is where having an opaque type > > breaks down for scripts that want to make sure FILE is a real type. > > > Oh c'mon! we're going to revert this needed fix just because of > autoconf?
Pretty much. It appears that FILE has been public for so long that there is a lot of code that assumes it can use it. -- John Baldwin _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
