From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 21420 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2021 17:57:41 -0000 Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 16 Apr 2021 17:57:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 5527 invoked by uid 550); 16 Apr 2021 17:57:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 5507 invoked from network); 16 Apr 2021 17:57:38 -0000 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at disroot.org To: Rich Felker DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=disroot.org; s=mail; t=1618595845; bh=wKt/Vv6qnuSO/VGk+ZKdviV7KTy2ZWcgthSFcs2d89M=; h=To:References:From:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To; b=FAJIHV9fQRoJi4xVnjpvvN9qUncybcBbZ83bSYZcxps35ogD95XrOpRDeLAIzI3Pi r6qDwMLi70WHDL8glfkGv6sqr2OjV8yXbeQ0NK7eoWqVKjHL6TVAvSEXiMVWNgPfBE 1YRN+4ISlqx0OKepAu1Zuj1RIMbfVrBg38ZEkk8k99FUaQoHhftBLj7hrvmNkCk78s 8d4swg3vH07no9UfmmIz3/kfxG71WlynAVEcO1RPoOnWQlvSjR9ywyTLDLm0N/ci6a X2i+dc50fEZWWPy00NTzWtR8ZpchpaP27YzM7Vb2gBklxYffmrj3RDunwxmnQnsNzf Ek4e43EdKk9Eg== References: <20210416003521.2147-1-ericonr@disroot.org> <20210416003521.2147-2-ericonr@disroot.org> <20210416142658.GO2546@brightrain.aerifal.cx> From: =?UTF-8?Q?=c3=89rico_Nogueira?= Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 14:57:21 -0300 Mime-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210416142658.GO2546@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH 2/2] include in Em 16/04/2021 11:26, Rich Felker escreveu: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 09:35:21PM -0300, Érico Nogueira wrote: >> GCC source code does contain a function to pre-include the >> header for glibc targets, but even so glibc still I seem to have been mistaken about the feature being glibc specific; using echo "" | cc -xc - -E it seems the file does end up being included automatically. However, when using clang instead of gcc, it isn't included automatically. I don't know if this is something that clang ought to fix, is there some sort of standard about ? Michael Forney's cproc compiler doesn't seem to touch it either. >> includes it in their own header. furthermore, even if GCC >> implemented this for musl targets, it is still necessary for other >> compilers or previous versions of GCC. >> --- >> include/features.h | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/features.h b/include/features.h >> index 85cfb72a..f3d53cbe 100644 >> --- a/include/features.h >> +++ b/include/features.h >> @@ -1,6 +1,8 @@ >> #ifndef _FEATURES_H >> #define _FEATURES_H >> >> +#include >> + >> #if defined(_ALL_SOURCE) && !defined(_GNU_SOURCE) >> #define _GNU_SOURCE 1 >> #endif >> -- >> 2.31.1 > > I've hesitated to do this because features.h is not consistently > included from all standard headers (only if it's needed), and the > result would be inconsistent exposure of these macros. (Also > inconsistent if they're checked before any standard headers are > included, which is unfixable.) I think it makes more sense to just add > "-include stdc-predef.h" to the compiler specfile or equivalent if it > doesn't auto-include it, so that you get behavior that actually > matches the spec. Do you know if clang can use the specfile? That would make it worth it adding the entry, since GCC has the expected behavior already. > > Rich >