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
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-12-06 17:17    [W:0.044 / U:1.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site