Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 14:54:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@FreeBSD.org> To: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: PERFORCE change 34512 for review Message-ID: <200307142154.h6ELs3mA099458@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=34512 Change 34512 by des@des.at.des.thinksec.com on 2003/07/14 14:53:19 FOPEN_MAX wasn't such a reliable <stdio.h> indicator after all, so use _IOFBF instead. Affected files ... .. //depot/projects/openpam/include/security/openpam.h#26 edit Differences ... ==== //depot/projects/openpam/include/security/openpam.h#26 (text+ko) ==== @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ * OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF * SUCH DAMAGE. * - * $P4: //depot/projects/openpam/include/security/openpam.h#25 $ + * $P4: //depot/projects/openpam/include/security/openpam.h#26 $ */ #ifndef _SECURITY_OPENPAM_H_INCLUDED @@ -120,10 +120,10 @@ /* * Read cooked lines. - * Checking for FOPEN_MAX is a fairly reliable way to detect the presence - * of <stdio.h> + * Checking for _IOFBF is a fairly reliable way to detect the presence + * of <stdio.h>, as SUSv3 requires it to be defined there. */ -#ifdef FOPEN_MAX +#ifdef _IOFBF char * openpam_readline(FILE *_f, int *_lineno,
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200307142154.h6ELs3mA099458>