Re: MIfying stdarg.h and dropping varargs.h

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 10:24:57PM +0200, Klaus Klein wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 08:42:44PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 06:32:35PM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 06:55:57PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> > 
> > >  > - Fix the _BSD_VA_LIST_ usage to actually define va_list in various
> > >  >   places as required by POSIX.
> > >  > 
> > >  > - Include sys/stdarg.h from sys/systm.h, it's used enough to simplify
> > >  >   the kernel sources that way.
> > >  > 
> > >  > - Stop abusing _BSD_VA_LIST_, just go with va_list directly, defining 
> > > it
> > >  >   as needed or including stdarg.h.
> > > 
> > > This breaks e.g. stdio.h, which is not allowed to define va_list.
> > 
> > POSIX explicitly requires it. C99 doesn't exactly make sense in this
> > regard as it requires it for the prototypes, but also requires including
> > stdarg.h first.
> 
> C89 went out of its way and made an attempt to play nice with existing
> code.  POSIX-2008, as a particular profile of C99, doesn't need to.

I guess C89 wanted to play with the varargs.h mess. The question is --
do we care about this?

> On a related note, the change to <syslog.h> defines va_list but it shouldn't;
> vsyslog() and friends aren't in POSIX, so at the very least the definition
> should be moved to the _NETBSD_SOURCE section.

Adjusted.

Joerg