On Sun, 25 Jun 2000, Alan Curry wrote:
> To which I say int sys_strerror(int,char*,size_t). "But what about i18n" you
> ask? I'd rather have a correct error message that I don't understand than one
> which I understand but is a lie.
Ever heard about portability? As in, somebody brings a program that
correctly handles -ENOENT on rename(). It had never heard about your
-ESRCNOENT. Program runs on Linux. Woops, we don't have that case in the
switch() and WTF it was, anyway? Sure, if a program does not try to handle
error conditions it will fail with a pretty message. Great. And I'm sure
that everyone will be oh-so-excited to see an imperial arseload of
programs sprinkled with symbols defined only on Linux. Furrfu...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 26 2000 - 21:00:06 EST