[Toybox] FreeBSD support patch.

[Felix Janda]

Just commenting on this:

Rob Landley wrote:
> As for the lib/portability.h patch: FreeBSD doesn't have features.h, but
> Linux and MacOS X agree on that one? Odd. Speaking of which, we have
> __FreeBSD__ without #including features.h?

The compiler might define it similarly to how it defines __linux__.

> As for this bit:
> 
> -#if !defined(__GLIBC__) && !defined(__BIONIC__)
> +#if !defined(__GLIBC__) && !defined(__BIONIC__) && !defined(__FreeBSD__)
> 
> If we didn't include features.h, we shouldn't have __GLIBC__ or
> __BIONIC__ #defined because that's the header that defines them. I'd
> also assume that if we're building on freebsd, we don't have those
> #defined either because it's got its own libc? So why add a __FreeBSD__
> guard symbol here?

For glibc it seems to me, that almost any header will include
<features.h>. So including <sys/types.h> is presumably enough to get
the definition of _GLIBC_. It might also work for the other systems
targetted by portability.h.

Felix

PS: Just to mention, there is also something called kfreebsd [1], which
will define both _GLIBC_ and __FreeBSD__ (but not __linux__).

[1]: http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu