Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 14:24:28 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: negative error status: gcc vs. cl Message-ID: <20040708122428.GC1389@cygbert.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i On Jul 8 14:00, Daniel Lungu wrote: > > Feel like bash tcsh on Cygwin mess up with negative exit status from a cl > > compiled .exe > > :) The answer is "don't do that". Use positive values in the range from > :) 0 to 255. See > :) http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/exit.html > > I wouldn't do that. The problem is other did it before me and I need running > their .exes in my GNUmakefile. > > The following prototype would prevent people getting such exit(-2) great ideas: > > void exit(unsigned status); Right, but in that case, the definition isn't SUSv3 compliant. Standards rule. That's the reason there are so many of them ;-) Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Co-Project Leader mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat, Inc. -- 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/