On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Feb 4, 2015, at 2:28 AM, Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: >> Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> writes: >>>> On Jan 28, 2015, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> On Jan 28, 2015, at 2:27 AM, Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> * Remove the definition of _XOPEN_SOURCE completely. > >>>>> I think I prefer this one… > >>>>> and there is no hint what host caused him to put the change in >>>> >>>> The 2005 timeframe suggests it was probably GNU/Linux > >>> I'm with Mike here: either we remove the _XOPEN_SOURCE definition now > >> It's been a week now since I posted the patches and there's still no >> conclusion which of the two alternatives to install. > > Well, my position is the removal of _XOPEN_SOURCE is the right patch. I’ve > not seen any substantive disagreement. I’d post and test that patch. A > build person, a libobjc person, a reasonably an affected target person or a > global person can approve in my book. I’m not any of them… If Pinski is > happy with my approving it, he can weigh in. I’d be happy to approve it.
I am happy with which ever approach is decided as the safest and most portable. Thanks, Andrew Pinski
