lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Linux should define ENOTSUP
On 12/7/06, Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> wrote:
> The quoted sentence is not shaded as an XSI extension, thus it is part of
> POSIX-1:2001.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. The change I pointed at was
accepted to the interpretations track which means that if we would
create a Technical Corrigendum 3 for the 2001 standard (which we are
not) the relaxation for the error values would be added. The current
situation is just as good, it's just as binding. There is no need to
reissue the standard to make such changes.

So, put this issue to rest. There is not issue. The whole premise
for the original post is wrong these days. There is no compliance
problem.
-
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: 2006-12-07 16:35    [W:0.034 / U:3.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site