From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CAA23858C52 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 19:40:54 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 2CAA23858C52 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 2CAA23858C52 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1707766855; cv=none; b=aTy2Xi5RcjHD4hJqqYuzWr1YxPH1OPOPpeQkKsZtYWX6wB1pVp8z/tYLpFo8T5CM7YNnV31L24Lbrfg9JLS4mSIlrjYeOWs8aI59LSraGG1r/vKQ/riZ/B6Odyc1xH2zv5SGsfO2pXulcLBa1dl3j/mxRnE6iG123f4dZ4aYCAo= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1707766855; c=relaxed/simple; bh=exor5OsJVsR0gyPT0yOx2Chnjm1jnBGZ257+mAM32gg=; h=DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=ZLGMS1B2wJNgM+tM0KDXUIeOZvPBXNuwccgtCNGfh6VcfLiYUCsL5hPexN5xmPmtLvlY2AI2uEd069RlKg2hYR0TT7aSwAw0m8icMElayV4J2IQkNqiRL0kiEoiKJHLIL/lYBbPmo7md9hJUDNYHxMFhfJYULdfLDg/4Rl58nXI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1707766853; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=3tgmYgbn7yxIDUmdR7WdYtP9Q0eU7uDiD4OQFl/bn1g=; b=RmYOqgoCXlGWY8WOrazqDr/l9LgxjBO18CTBTsoMVG/Di9ZsQgV7sZfGIBcBW+B+W2g4Zq TEj9TZqxm6mzSvVQ6exaY5TEJgNguytpW7SXzi+jGfYlLJTnLXHGsnfpkfeI3fl7+ymCCR WNJ5aKqCIGvSE5mFjPcy4sWerRuYR1A= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx-ext.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-663-AVs9ORq2O_i71VWXB4YS7g-1; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 14:40:48 -0500 X-MC-Unique: AVs9ORq2O_i71VWXB4YS7g-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 296071C0512A; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 19:40:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from calimero.vinschen.de (unknown [10.39.195.74]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 068CC492BFD; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 19:40:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by calimero.vinschen.de (Postfix, from userid 500) id F045DA80CB4; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 20:40:46 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 20:40:46 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: Torbjorn SVENSSON Cc: Joseph Myers , Newlib , Andrew Pinski , Yvan Roux Subject: Re: Mismatch between newlib and glibc regarding fileno Message-ID: Reply-To: newlib@sourceware.org Mail-Followup-To: Torbjorn SVENSSON , Joseph Myers , Newlib , Andrew Pinski , Yvan Roux References: <52858367-f116-413e-b107-61c8afce156b@foss.st.com> <42f199ba-8905-4846-9768-54342244610e@foss.st.com> <56b3303c-2634-6fc6-4d3b-c6e788962451@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.11.54.10 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Feb 12 20:27, Torbjorn SVENSSON wrote: > > > On 2024-02-12 19:14, Joseph Myers wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Feb 2024, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > > > How is it possible that with -std=c++98, everything and the kitchen sink > > > is enabled? Is that really correct?!? > > > > See (though > > is older). Much of > > the standard C++ library implementation is in the headers, which makes it > > tricky to implement without _GNU_SOURCE when the C++ library wants to use > > (internally) lots of features not in ISO C. > > > > So, based on this, is it correct that newlib includes the check for > __STRICT_ANSI__? > > I.e., should GCC tests be updated to add -D_POSIX_SOURCE or should the check > for __STRICT_ANSI__ be removed from the newlib features.h file? Or maybe > both should be done? glibc's feature.h performs the same __STRICT_ANSI__ checks, afaics. Corinna