X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 10:27:16 +0200 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Side-by-side configuration is incorrect reported as permission denied Message-ID: <20120813082716.GA11198@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <5025C431 DOT 7050201 AT cygwin DOT com> <20120812170641 DOT GC32748 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: 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 On Aug 12 18:49, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > On 08/12/2012 01:35 PM, Earnie Boyd wrote: > >On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 1:56 PM, 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. > [...] > Now I know that there are POSIX error codes and people tend to check > error numbers and you want to put the closest match of a POSIX errno > to the Windows error message. But why couldn't you just print to > stderr the error message that Windows returned perhaps in addition > to setting syserr to "Permission denied"? Do you really want that? There's a difference between cmd and Cygwin. Cmd is a shell, Cygwin is just the underlying shared lib providing a generic API. If an error occurs, it's the shell's responsibility to print an error message in the first place. All messages printed by Cygwin are not controllable by the calling application. Therefore we usually only print messages from the DLL if something very serious happens from the DLLs perspective. Some arbitrary Windows error code returned from CreateProcess is usually not something actually serious. There was just "some" reason that an application couldn't be started. Also, where do you draw the border? Which windows error code is serious enough to justify a (pretty intrusive!) error message from the underlying library and which isn't? As cgf pointed out, Windows has zillions of error codes. We wouldn't want to generate the same number of POSIX-like error codes. It wouldn't make a lot of sense since POSIX applications only test for a limited, expected number of error codes, and it might break things. Having said that, EACCES is not bad as far as error codes go in this case, but I like Cliff Hones' idea to choose another existing POSIX error like ELIBACC, "Can not access a needed shared library", which might make more sense in this scenario. I'd also like ENOPKG, "Package not installed". Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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