Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: ENOIOCTLCMD? | Date | Sun, 13 May 2001 17:45:17 +0100 (BST) | From | Alan Cox <> |
| |
> What I was arguing (conceptually) is that something like > #define ENOIOCTLCMD ENOTTY > or preferably but more invasively s/ENOIOCTLCMD/ENOTTY/ (mutatis mutandis) > > would result in no loss of function. I assert that ENOIOCTLCMD is > redundant, pending a specific counterexample.
On the contrary. I can now no longer force an unsupported response when there is a generic routine I dont wish to use
- 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/
| |