Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:14:05 +0100 | From | Samuel Thibault <> | Subject | Re: Linux should define ENOTSUP |
| |
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; }
Samuel - 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/
| |