X-Recipient: archive-cygwin@delorie.com X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,KHOP_RCVD_TRUST,KHOP_THREADED,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_YE X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5028B9D5.6050007@gmx.de> References: <5025C431.7050201@cygwin.com> <20120812170641.GC32748@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <20120812205407.GA7337@ednor.casa.cgf.cx> <5028B9D5.6050007@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:51:09 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Side-by-side configuration is incorrect reported as permission denied From: Earnie Boyd To: cygwin@cygwin.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com 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. > > > On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:07:00AM +0200, Pawel Jasinski wrote: > >> If you can find a nice Linux errno which maps from >> ERROR_SXS_CANT_GEN_ACTCTX >> to something other than EACCES I'd be happy to change Cygwin. > > > I had a quick poke into sys/errno.h and there i found 5 error codes > beginning with ELIB. One of those should suffice. My fafourite is this: > Not valid for exec() to return. > #define ELIBBAD 84. /* Accessing a corrupted shared lib */ > > Because side-by-side problems may mean that the supporting DLL is > acutally there and can be read (also for execute), but the accompanying > XML file describes it incorrectly (e.g. wrong version number), the DLL > is not signed correctly, is not placed in the subdirectory whose name > is mandated by Windows, etc. > >> Otherwise, no, I'm not going to worry about this issue. > > > There is no need for the 'no', i'd suggest ELIBBAD. Again, not an error message that exec() should return. -- Earnie -- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd -- 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