lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux should define ENOTSUP
Samuel Thibault wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin, le Wed 06 Dec 2006 07:35:49 -0800, a écrit :
>> Samuel Thibault wrote:
>>>> The two can't be done at the same time. In fact, the two probably can't
>>>> be done without a period of quite a few *years* between them.
>>> Not a reason for not doing it ;)
>> No, but breakage is. There has to be a major benefit to justify the
>> cost, and you, at least, have not provided such a justification.
>
> Well, as I said, existing code like
>
> switch(errno) {
> case ENOTSUP:
> foo();
> break;
> case EOPNOTSUP:
> bar();
> break;
> }
>

That's pretty weak, though.

-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-12-06 17:49    [W:0.051 / U:0.012 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site