Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 23:08:18 -0500 (CDT) From: "Sean C. Farley" <sean-freebsd@farley.org> To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS DOWN Message-ID: <20070502230413.Y30614@thor.farley.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0705022034180.8590@sea.ntplx.net> References: <20070501083009.GA4627@nagual.pp.ru> <20070501160645.GA9333@nagual.pp.ru> <20070501135439.B36275@thor.farley.org> <20070502.102822.-957833022.imp@bsdimp.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0705021332020.8590@sea.ntplx.net> <20070502183100.P1317@baba.farley.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0705022034180.8590@sea.ntplx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2 May 2007, Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Wed, 2 May 2007, Sean C. Farley wrote: <snip> >> 2. getenv() sets errno to EINVAL and returns NULL if given a bad name >> to find. setenv() and unsetenv() perform the same check on the >> name; should not getenv() do the same? The check is easy to >> remove. > > I don't think getenv() should set errno. The fact that it > returns NULL is sufficient and POSIX doesn't define any errors > for it. Fixed for errno. Also, no value is appropriate for errno when the name does not exist. How about the feature that getenv() returns a NULL for a bad name instead of allowing a core dump? Is that acceptable? Sean -- sean-freebsd@farley.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070502230413.Y30614>