On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 11:34:03PM +0200, Armin Rigo wrote:
> Sorry, I don't follow you. As far as I know the Linux man page is not
> clear about what occurs to errno if readdir() doesn't return NULL...
Exactly :) My reading of it is that readdir returns: NULL and sets errno if
an error occurred
Hi Laurence,
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Laurence Tratt wrote:
> The point that eventually became clear to me is that returning NULL and
> setting errno are not necessarily connected, which was the original mistake I
> made. errors can happen (and errno set) even if readdir hasn't hit the en
Thanks that makes sense.
For me, I made sure to add it to my notes. To avoid confusion for
others, it may be good to either add this info on the website right
after the building from source, or adding a Makefile target named
"tarball" or something.
Cheers,
Davide Del Vento,
NCAR Computationa
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 01:51:48PM +0200, Armin Rigo wrote:
> According to these mails, the issue you've hit is different: what occurs to
> errno if readdir() returns NULL. This is indeed strange but documented.
> But what occurs to errno if readdir() does *not* return NULL? I thought
> that err
Hi Laurence,
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Laurence Tratt wrote:
>> Shooting in the dark, but one possible reading of the man page shows
>> that when readdir() returns a non-null pointer, the value of errno
>> might be randomly modified.
>
> Yes, this is true and bit me in a different context
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 06:05:39PM +0200, Armin Rigo wrote:
> Shooting in the dark, but one possible reading of the man page shows
> that when readdir() returns a non-null pointer, the value of errno
> might be randomly modified.
Yes, this is true and bit me in a different context just over a yea
