On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Rainer Orth <r...@cebitec.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote: > Gabriel Dos Reis <g...@integrable-solutions.net> writes: > >>> diff --git a/libstdc++-v3/include/c_global/cstdio >>> b/libstdc++-v3/include/c_global/cstdio >>> index fcbec0c..037a668 100644 >>> --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/c_global/cstdio >>> +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/c_global/cstdio >>> @@ -131,7 +131,9 @@ namespace std >>> using ::sprintf; >>> using ::sscanf; >>> using ::tmpfile; >>> +#if !defined __UCLIBC__ || defined __UCLIBC_SUSV4_LEGACY__ >>> using ::tmpnam; >>> +#endif >>> using ::ungetc; >>> using ::vfprintf; >>> using ::vprintf; >>> -- >>> 1.7.10.4 >>> >> >> Sounds good to me. > > Do we really want to use target-specific macros directly instead of > defining something more abstract either via a configure test or a define > in config/os/uclibc? > > Rainer
What would your suggestion for defineingsomething more abstract that reliably says whether the feature is deprecated or absent? > > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Rainer Orth, Center for Biotechnology, Bielefeld University
