Mail Archives: cygwin/2009/01/11/11:14:43
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/
- Raw text -