Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 18:44:37 -0500 (CDT) From: "Sean C. Farley" <sean-freebsd@farley.org> To: Andrey Chernov <ache@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Daniel Eischen <deischen@FreeBSD.org>, arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS DOWN Message-ID: <20070511182126.U9004@baba.farley.org> In-Reply-To: <20070511003443.GA6422@nagual.pp.ru> References: <20070504213312.GA33163@nagual.pp.ru> <20070504174657.D1343@thor.farley.org> <20070505213202.GA49925@nagual.pp.ru> <20070505163707.J6670@thor.farley.org> <20070505221125.GA50439@nagual.pp.ru> <20070506091835.A43775@besplex.bde.org> <20070508162458.G6015@baba.farley.org> <20070508222521.GA59534@nagual.pp.ru> <20070509200000.B56490@besplex.bde.org> <20070510184447.H4969@baba.farley.org> <20070511003443.GA6422@nagual.pp.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 11 May 2007, Andrey Chernov wrote: > On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 06:58:45PM -0500, Sean C. Farley wrote: >> Would there be any other changes anybody can see need to be made? What >> type of testing would be desired? The regression tests I wrote provide >> a good basic test. > > I worry about this sort of things > errx(EXIT_FAILURE, "environ corrupt"); > > There is no mention anywhere that *env() functions can exit the > program. Moreover some programs in theory can temprorarily put > incorrect values into environment via putenv() after-modification or > direct environ assignments for their own reasons. > > I suggest to change errx() to warnx()+return(failure). No need to worry any longer; I changed them into warnx(). What value should I give errno? I do not want the program to receive a random error code. The first warnx() could be EINVAL. The second warnx() would be a coding error on my part. EDOOFUS would fit. :) I know I should not use it. EINVAL? Sean -- sean-freebsd@farley.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070511182126.U9004>