[PATCH] Declare sethostname() if __BSD_VISIBLE is defined

[PATCH] Declare sethostname() if __BSD_VISIBLE is defined

[Sebastian Huber]

Prototype is according to glibc and not FreeBSD which uses int for the
second parameter.  I am not sure how to do the alternative feature test
described in the Linux manpage.

newlib/ChangeLog
2014-10-24  Sebastian Huber  <sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de>

	* libc/include/sys/unistd.h (sethostname): Declare if
	__BSD_VISIBLE is defined.
---
 newlib/libc/include/sys/unistd.h | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/newlib/libc/include/sys/unistd.h b/newlib/libc/include/sys/unistd.h
index 2c3afc9..0d6dd92 100644
--- a/newlib/libc/include/sys/unistd.h
+++ b/newlib/libc/include/sys/unistd.h
@@ -166,6 +166,9 @@ int     _EXFUN(setgid, (gid_t __gid ));
 #if defined(__CYGWIN__)
 int	_EXFUN(setgroups, (int ngroups, const gid_t *grouplist ));
 #endif
+#if defined(__BSD_VISIBLE)
+int     _EXFUN(sethostname, (const char *, size_t));
+#endif
 int     _EXFUN(setpgid, (pid_t __pid, pid_t __pgid ));
 int     _EXFUN(setpgrp, (void ));
 #if defined(__CYGWIN__) && !defined(__INSIDE_CYGWIN__)
-- 
1.8.4.5

Re: [PATCH] Declare sethostname() if __BSD_VISIBLE is defined

[Corinna Vinschen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 574 bytes --]

Hi Sebastian,

On Oct 24 09:57, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> Prototype is according to glibc and not FreeBSD which uses int for the
> second parameter.  I am not sure how to do the alternative feature test
> described in the Linux manpage.

Testing for defined(__BSD_VISIBLE) seems wrong to me.  Per sys/cdefs.h
__BSD_VISIBLE is often define as 0.  Taking the Linux man page into
account, shouldn't that be something like

  #if __BSD_VISIBLE || (defined (_XOPEN_SOURCE) && __XSI_VISIBLE < 500)

?


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen
Cygwin Maintainer
Red Hat

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] Declare sethostname() if __BSD_VISIBLE is defined

[Sebastian Huber]

On 24/10/14 11:39, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Oct 24 09:57, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> >Prototype is according to glibc and not FreeBSD which uses int for the
>> >second parameter.  I am not sure how to do the alternative feature test
>> >described in the Linux manpage.
> Testing for defined(__BSD_VISIBLE) seems wrong to me.  Per sys/cdefs.h
> __BSD_VISIBLE is often define as 0.  Taking the Linux man page into
> account, shouldn't that be something like
>
>    #if __BSD_VISIBLE || (defined (_XOPEN_SOURCE) && __XSI_VISIBLE < 500)
>
> ?

Oh, yes, this defined(__BSD_VISIBLE) is nonsense.  I send a new patch.

-- 
Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH

Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany
Phone   : +49 89 189 47 41-16
Fax     : +49 89 189 47 41-09
E-Mail  : sebastian.huber@embedded-brains.de
PGP     : Public key available on request.

Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG.