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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* manual/errno.texi (Error Codes): Fix ENOSYS description.
Add ENOTSUP.
2002-08-26 Roland McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* 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
comment
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.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU http://www.gnu.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Marcus Brinkmann The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/
_______________________________________________
Help-hurd mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-hurd
