Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:12:37 -0500 From: "Jeremy Messenger" <mezz7@cox.net> To: "Luigi Rizzo" <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: best way to work around <malloc.h> vs <stdlib.h> ? Message-ID: <op.uf5bjbr19aq2h7@mezz.mezzweb.com> In-Reply-To: <20080819172631.GA25160@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> References: <20080819172631.GA25160@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:26:31 -0500, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> wrote: > A fair amount of third party software in ports still uses <malloc.h> > which in our system is like this: > > /* $FreeBSD: src/include/malloc.h,v 1.5 2001/11/07 23:14:31 obrien Exp > $ */ > #if __STDC__ > #error "<malloc.h> has been replaced by <stdlib.h>" > #else > #include <stdlib.h> > #endif > > What is the best way to disable the error without an > explicit patch (there are over 200 patchfiles in ports > just doing that) ? I think patch it is best, because if I understand it corrects is that malloc() in stdlib.h is standard of ANSI C. Correct me if I am wrong. However, I don't see anything wrong with patch. You can simple use wildcard (*.c) or use find(1) to find files to replace the malloc.h -> stdlib.h by use REINPLACE_CMD without have to create multi-file patch. Cheers, Mezz > I tried the following > > + CPPFLAGS += -U__STDC__ > seems to work, though it gives some warnings because a > built-in define is undefined. Also i am not sure if there > are other parts of the system that are affected; > > + CPPFLAGS += -traditional-cpp > is also reported to unset __STDC__, but it generates an > independent set of warnings and errors; > > Any other ideas ? > > cheers > luigi -- mezz7@cox.net - mezz@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD GNOME Team http://www.FreeBSD.org/gnome/ - gnome@FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?op.uf5bjbr19aq2h7>