X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_WL
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<502904B1.6040403@hones.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 13 Aug 2012 14:44:17 +0100
From:	Cliff Hones <cliff AT hones DOT org DOT uk>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120713 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Side-by-side configuration is incorrect reported as permission denied
References:	<k045k2$gvk$1 AT dough DOT gmane DOT org> <5025C431 DOT 7050201 AT cygwin DOT com> <CA+7connXxSSkw-fhHvqbVanEvX7YHOVVdLndmqmd07xRvFT49Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20120812170641 DOT GC32748 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <CA+7conm=AXUX9Xfj67tGRgMbrgC47W9QHuQ2L3V2p_=7Cf81GQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CA+sc5m=myjskB4zG0HARWHvZMQGz-k=j7jT=q1Gny4XpNgMfCg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20120812205407 DOT GA7337 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <CA+7conmB1mt25F+d1-TsseeK=eXRRD5JrGW42u=Mka8061A7Zg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <5028B9D5 DOT 6050007 AT gmx DOT de> <CA+sc5mkUpWBu4Ef22A3XKiSnWgkZZ79wgtSvSWC3spXETXT+iQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<CA+sc5mkUpWBu4Ef22A3XKiSnWgkZZ79wgtSvSWC3spXETXT+iQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Spam-Score:	-0.0 (/) (knockando.watchfront.net.uk)
X-Spam-Report:	knockando.watchfront.net.uk has scanned this email for spam. Results:- T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 (total -0.0, current threshold 5.0)
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 13/08/2012 13:51, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:24 AM, Herbert Stocker wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Imho, EACCESS is indeed a bit misleading because it suggests permission
>> problems. Better would be to have an EFAIL as a generic error. Actually i
>> was missing an EFAIL several times when my programs needed to return
>> an error code that did not match well with what i found in errno.h .
> 
> You may think it is misleading but
> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009604499/functions/exec.html
> states that EACCESS is the correct value.

Well, for a start that's an POSIX V1.  Here's a link to V2 exec:

   http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/exec.html

I don't see in the description for EACCES [Note - one S, not two]
that it should be returned when there is a missing runtime component.

Also, see this general page on errors.  The errors documented for a
particular function aren't intended to be exhaustive.  An implementation
can return others as long as it is consistent.

   http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/V2_chap02.html#tag_15_03

In any case Cygwin's primary aim is to provide a Linux-like environment,
not pure POSIX.  Linux exec/execve manpages list many more error codes.

-- Cliff


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -