Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:00:06 +0100 From: Stefan Farfeleder <stefan@fafoe.narf.at> To: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] libc_r bug: successful close(2) sets errno to ENOTTY Message-ID: <20031124230004.GB585@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> In-Reply-To: <20031124.153349.13027396.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20031124174457.GB27782@madman.celabo.org> <03a601c3b2b5$7bc15b80$b9844051@insultant.net> <20031124182322.GB621@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> <20031124.153349.13027396.imp@bsdimp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 03:33:49PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <20031124182322.GB621@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> > Stefan Farfeleder <stefan@fafoe.narf.at> writes: > : On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 07:05:02PM +0100, boyd, rounin wrote: > : > From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> > : > > The application is broken. You must only check errno if you get an > : > > error indication from the library call. > : > > : > errno is only meaningful after a syscall error. > : > : Wrong, counter-example: strtol(). > > errno is meaningful for syscalls after an error (the original > message). The fact that other functions also dink with errno is not > relevant to that statement. I read boyd's statement as a contradiction to Jacques' one (only after syscall error vs. after library call error). If that's a misinterpretation, I'm sorry. Stefan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031124230004.GB585>