[openbeos] Re: suggestions: iconv.h, libiconv, and iconv

  • From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2003 11:42:33 +0200 CEST

"Andrew Bachmann" <shatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 15:37:35 +0200 CEST "Ingo Weinhold" <
> bonefish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > We can as well build the `normal' version and write the <iconv.h> 
> > functions as simple wrappers for the GNU ones.
> I'm okay with following this one too, especially since I got it 
> working
> "manually".  Should I check libiconv into our cvs somehow?  Perhaps
> in current/src/libs/iconv?  The build system is configure/makefile, 
> should I convert it to jam?

Please not yet! As I said, we should have a deeper look at libroots 
needs first, and decide where to put it when we did that.
I don't think there is a point in putting it in now, only to have it 
somewhere when it's going to be removed or moved soon (you remember, 
stupid/simple CVS cannot move files around).

> Also, are you proposing that we write iconv functions in the
> header file that call libiconv functions?  I think it might be more
> straightforward to just build it in plugin mode.

I agree here. And still, the glibc iconv version directly exports the 
right names.

> The only other nit I have left is how to address the prototype issue.
> 
> I can add the gnu iconv.h to headers/libs/iconv and build only
> libiconv using it.  (gnu iconv.h has const and other messiness)
> If the other apps use the public posix/iconv.h header
> then the function will still presumably link. (right?)
> 
> As far as I can tell the posix standard is to not use const:
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/toc.htm

OTOH if both, Linux and the BSD world is using "const", I see little or 
no problems in using "const" as well.
But of course, in order to be fully Posix compatible, we would have to 
ditch it.

Adios...
   Axel.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. haiku
  3. Archive
  4. 08-2003