traverseda
/
cpython
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Releases Wiki Activity

Do not define _XOPEN_SOURCE on OpenBSD 2.x and 3.[012]. Fixes #635034

This commit is contained in:
Martin v. Löwis 2002-11-11 13:26:51 +00:00
parent 35195ad221
commit e981a4eb36
1 changed files with 25 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

27
configure.in
View File

@ -33,9 +33,10 @@ AC_DEFINE(_GNU_SOURCE, 1, [Define on Linux to activate all library features])
AH_VERBATIM([_XOPEN_SOURCE],
[/* Define on UNIX to activate XPG/5 features. */
#ifndef _XOPEN_SOURCE
# define _XOPEN_SOURCE 500
# undef _XOPEN_SOURCE
#endif])
AC_DEFINE(_XOPEN_SOURCE, 500)
define_xopen_source=yes
# On Tru64 Unix 4.0F, defining _XOPEN_SOURCE also requires definition
# of _XOPEN_SOURCE_EXTENDED and _POSIX_C_SOURCE, or else several APIs
@ -113,6 +114,28 @@ then
esac
fi
# Some systems cannot stand _XOPEN_SOURCE being defined at all; they
# disable features if it is defined, without any means to access these
# features as extensions. For these systems, we skip the definition of
# _XOPEN_SOURCE. Before adding a system to the list to gain access to
# some feature, make sure there is no alternative way to access this
# feature. Also, when using wildcards, make sure you have verified the
# need for not defining _XOPEN_SOURCE on all systems matching the
# wildcard, and that the wildcard does not include future systems
# (which may remove their limitations).
dnl quadrigraphs "@<:@" and "@:>@" produce "[" and "]" in the output
case $ac_sys_system/$ac_sys_release in
# On OpenBSD, select(2) is not available if _XOPEN_SOURCE is defined,
# even though select is a POSIX function. Reported by J. Ribbens.
OpenBSD/2.* | OpenBSD/3.@<:@012@:>@)
define_xopen_source=no;;
esac
if test $define_xopen_source = yes
then
AC_DEFINE(_XOPEN_SOURCE, 500)
fi
#
# SGI compilers allow the specification of the both the ABI and the
# ISA on the command line. Depending on the values of these switches,