[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


From: Marcus Brinkmann
Subject: Re: Why is ENOTSUP == ECANCELED?
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:00:11 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.4i

On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 07:44:19PM -0400, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:35:56PM +0200, Andreas Voegele wrote:
> > > In /include/bits/errno.h both ENOTSUP and ECANCELED get the value
> > > _HURD_ERRNO(118).  Is this intended?
> > 
> > I don't think so.  Roland can you fix this if it is wrong?
> They certainly should not have the same number.  The Hurd numbers are
> determined by magic comments in libc/manual/errno.texi; it appears that
> someone added some codes to errno.texi with magic comments and picked some
> random numbers for them (probably Linux numbers) instead of omitting them.

That someone was you :)

1999-01-22  Roland McGrath  <>

        * manual/errno.texi (Error Codes): Fix ENOSYS description.
        Add ENOTSUP.

2002-08-26  Roland McGrath  <>

        * manual/errno.texi (Error Codes): Added ECANCELED (118 for Hurd).

> That needs to be fixed.  Can you compare all the numbers in errno.texi with
> those that existing Hurd binaries were really using, and assign unused
> numbers to any excess errno codes the Hurd didn't previously have?

I have not done any actual comparison.  Here is a description of all error
values in that file:

1 - 106: Have a comment "@c DO NOT REMOVE"
107 - 117: XOPEN error codes added by Thomas (ChangeLog.6), missing that
118: Occurs twice

Furthermore, several ???/<NR> variants as well as ???/??? with Linux error
codes.  If these have any effect, they need to be fixed as the <NR> collides
with the numbers 1 - 118 above.


`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]