Re: toolchain/48835 (gcc or assembler problem, shown by gdbm-1.11)

[Klaus Klein <kleink%kleink.org@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR toolchain/48835; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Klaus Klein <kleink%kleink.org@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: standards-manager%netbsd.org@localhost, gnats-admin%netbsd.org@localhost,
        netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, Thomas Klausner 
<wiz%NetBSD.org@localhost>
Subject: Re: toolchain/48835 (gcc or assembler problem, shown by gdbm-1.11)
Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 11:25:28 +0200

 On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 09:05:00PM +0000, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
 > The following reply was made to PR toolchain/48835; it has been noted by 
 > GNATS.
 > 
 > From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>
 > To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
 > Cc: 
 > Subject: Re: toolchain/48835 (gcc or assembler problem, shown by gdbm-1.11)
 > Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 23:00:20 +0200
 > 
 >  On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 12:12:21AM +0000, dholland%NetBSD.org@localhost 
 > wrote:
 >  > Responsible-Changed-Why:
 >  > get the attention of people who know about namespace stuff
 >  
 >  Well, the macros has been literally around since the ancient time. Even
 >  Linux had it until recently, so I would just punt out on this.
 
 <sys/ioctl.h> has for a long time been rather notorious for carrying
 a lot of baggage, and there's been little motivation to narrow down
 its namespace consumption.  (Think BSD ioctl vs. the entirely
 different way System V went, with the former seeing no standardization
 effort.)
 
 Prior art of dealing with this has been to fix the application.
 
 
 - Klaus