Hello, Masanori Ogino writes: > 2016-04-07 11:26 GMT+09:00 Daiki Ueno : >> Masanori Ogino writes: >>> That is why I proposed to have a blacklist of "broken" implementations >>> as an option. >>> >>> AFAIK there have already been some blacklisting in autotools e.g. >>> checking the version of glibc to reject specific broken implementation >>> of a function. Thus, I think it's acceptable to use a blacklist. What >>> do you think about it? >> >> Yes, that sounds like a good idea. But I guess we then need to collect >> information about incompatible implementations. In this regard I'm >> actually not sure if the gettext-tools test coverage can be used as an >> indicator of compatibility. > > Indeed. I was wondering if there is anything could be done in the upcoming gettext release. Let's go back to the original explanation by Bruno: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-utils/2006-03/msg00011.html where he states two things: 1. The purpose of the checks are excluding incompatible implementations, e.g., NetBSD (around 1.5?) and Solaris 7 2. The __GNU_GETTEXT_SUPPORTED_REVISION macro is a recent addition In that case, I guess we could bypass the symbol checks if __GNU_GETTEXT_SUPPORTED_REVISION is defined, as long as broken implementations do not define it. How about the attached patch? Regards, -- Daiki Ueno