This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: find assert
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:13:49 +0100
- Subject: Re: find assert
- References: <495A4B87.3080009@partners.org> <20081230170638.GB5230@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20081230174104.GD5230@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20081230175246.GE5230@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20081230190603.GA13443@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <49695A74.1010302@byu.net> <20090111091638.GH400@calimero.vinschen.de> <496A0673.108@byu.net>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Jan 11 07:47, Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Corinna Vinschen on 1/11/2009 2:16 AM:
> > Are you proposing that Cygwin should change setting errno from ENOSHARE
> > to ENOENT? ENOSHARE is only set in one single instance and is only
> > explicitly requested in another. AFAICS, dropping ENOSHARE entirely
> > would only simplify the code and should have no negative consequences
> > (knock on wood here).
>
> Changing from ENOSHARE to ENOENT would certainly be more POSIX-compliant -
> the error is conveying the information that a path does not exist. Also,
> if you put some historical context on the problem, ENOSHARE predates the
> implementation of the // namespace. Back when //server did not represent
> a valid path name, it made sense to have a different error for
> //nosuch/share seeing as how //nosuch could never resolve on its own. But
> now that //nosuch can potentially resolve, it makes sense to treat it like
> any other path name that can potentially resolve, by returning ENOENT.
That makes sense. I changed ENOSHARE to ENOENT throughout.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/