Consequences of major libc changes

[Joerg Sonnenberger]

On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 04:57:55PM +0200, Erik Wikstr?m wrote:
> On 2009-04-13 15:10, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 03:28:23PM +0300, Hasso Tepper wrote:
> >> The problem is that there is too many packages with common problem (for 
> >> DragonFly) - they don't include unistd.h, but compile regardless of that 
> >> on Linux, NetBSD and FreeBSD, seems. Many of such packages are C++. Maybe 
> >> there is something wrong with our compiler? Examples of such packages are 
> >> ham/fldigi, x11/nucleo and editors/notecase.
> > 
> > I don't think it is the compiler. I also can't find any other *system*
> > header on NetBSD that pulls in unistd.h (except getopt.h, but that does
> > so on DragonFly as well).
> 
> What I can't understand is why C++ programs would have problems with
> unistd.h more than C programs. Might it be that one of the C++ headers
> pulls it in on Linux and NetBSD but not on DragonFly (they should not
> since unistd.h is not part of ISO C or C++)?

Missing prototypes are generally ignored in C mode.

As I said, for the system headers I can't find a difference, which is
what is puzzling me.

Joerg