From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KULCW-0008Uc-KB
	for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 08:48:12 -0400
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KULCT-0008TW-F6
	for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 08:48:09 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KULCS-0008S5-04
	for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 08:48:09 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33589 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KULCR-0008Rl-Qn
	for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 08:48:07 -0400
Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.171]:51909)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <fzielcke@z-51.de>) id 1KULCR-0001al-6u
	for grub-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 08:48:07 -0400
Received: from [85.180.35.62] (e180035062.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.180.35.62])
	by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mrelayeu2) with ESMTP (Nemesis)
	id 0MKwtQ-1KULCQ0FGN-0005Ma; Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:48:06 +0200
From: Felix Zielcke <fzielcke@z-51.de>
To: The development of GRUB 2 <grub-devel@gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20080816123908.GF6334@thorin>
References: <1218888325.4051.17.camel@fz.local> <20080816123908.GF6334@thorin>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:48:08 +0200
Message-Id: <1218890888.5316.12.camel@fz.local>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/9Aa9UxSGs/8KPKRMxi0/YttgQ+Sb9CuMQ9nc
	YE0IMrqIO6iHBaBlFQrTWi3yZWGzsg/1MiyZkIuJrXBjjXkvo+
	Oo1wcCTE73fdmRi9MKtBojJa8MoR/Zj
X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6? (barebone, rare!)
Subject: Re: [RFC] Is it okay to just use GNU extensions or should an
	alternative be provided too?
X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 <grub-devel@gnu.org>
List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 <grub-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel>,
	<mailto:grub-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/grub-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:grub-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:grub-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel>,
	<mailto:grub-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2008 12:48:09 -0000

Am Samstag, den 16.08.2008, 14:39 +0200 schrieb Robert Millan:
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 02:05:25PM +0200, Felix Zielcke wrote:
> > I just talked with Marco on IRC.
> > 
> > I have just used asprintf in one of my patches, but now I discovered:
> > http://grub.enbug.org/BuildingOnNonGnu
> > 
> > So I became a bit unsure now if it's okay to just use asprintf.
> 
> IIRC, asprintf is widely available.  At least it's present on *BSD.

Good.

> > I doubt it would be good to use many `#ifdef _GNU_SOURCE' in the code.
> 
> _GNU_SOURCE is used to tell Glibc to enable GNU extensions.  When you want
> to check from Glibc whether you're on Glibc,  __GLIBC__ indicates that.
> 
> But using autoconf checks is better anyway.

configure.ac has already AC_GNU_SOURCE

config.h.in says:
/* Enable GNU extensions on systems that have them.  */

For me it just seems that it's not a requirement so ./configure suceeds.
Or am I wrong and I can just assume that asprintf is avaible?