This is the mail archive of the cygwin-developers mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Jul 26 12:05, Yaakov Selkowitz wrote: > On 2017-07-26 04:50, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > diff --git a/newlib/libc/include/sys/features.h b/newlib/libc/include/sys/features.h > > index 1f9271b..c9133af 100644 > > --- a/newlib/libc/include/sys/features.h > > +++ b/newlib/libc/include/sys/features.h > > @@ -505,10 +505,9 @@ extern "C" { > > /* #define _XOPEN_UNIX -1 */ > > #endif /* __XSI_VISIBLE */ > > > > -/* The value corresponds to UNICODE version 4.0, which is the version > > - supported by XP. Newlib supports 5.2 (2011) but so far Cygwin needs > > - the MS conversions for double-byte charsets. */ > > -#define __STDC_ISO_10646__ 200305L > > +/* The value corresponds to UNICODE version 5.2, which is the current > > + state of newlib's wide char conversion functions. */ > > +#define __STDC_ISO_10646__ 200910L > > I have at least one case (glib) where I had to undefine this: > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.os.cygwin.ports.general/1330 > > Is this just a bad assumption of the following glib code: > > https://git.gnome.org/browse/glib/tree/glib/gunicollate.c > > or does __STDC_ISO_10646__ really imply a 32-bit wchar_t, in which case > we shouldn't be defining it at all? We had a discussion about this a couple of years back, and there's a bit of disagreement. Start here: https://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/2011-01/msg00401.html Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |