[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Ok, making ready for pre-2.4 and code-freeze..
Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> Hi Rogier,
> You said:
> > The return code for unix system calls should be defined as "negative"
> > for error, and not "-1".
> I beg to differ because lseek(2) has the right to return negative offsets
> on some implementations (of UNIX) on some architectures (notably i386).

I beg to differ: lseek has no right to return a position before the
start of the file.

* Upon successful completion, lseek returns the resulting
* offset location as measured in bytes from the beginning of
* the file.

Maybe, some OSes are "breaking the rules" a bit by allowing larger
files than a 31-bit return value for lseek(2) allows, but that's their

And if you're bending the rules, I feel fine with reserving
-1000 to -1 as "Error returns" and allowing 4G-1000 byte files.


** ** ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
"I didn't say it was your fault. I said I was going to blame it on you."

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.032 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site