"Nelson H. F. Beebe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=773937&group_id=1107&atid=101107
That's a bug report against the LSB spec, not against lsbcc.
As I understand it, the bug was resolved by saying that
the LSB spec defers to POSIX,
On 9/28/06, Nelson H. F. Beebe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Neither ISO C89 nor ISO C99 Standards mention any header files in the
location.
This lack-of-definition failure is readily exhibited:
% cat bug-lsbcc.c
#include
size_t p;
% lsbcc -c bug-lsbcc.c
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes about the failure of
in the Linux Standards Base to define size_t.
>> ...
>> "Nelson H. F. Beebe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > This is the same problem as before with size_t being used before
>> > it is defined with this compiler.
>>
>> is one thing;
