Hi!
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 22:31:42 +0200, Pino Toscano
wrote:
> Alle mercoledì 19 ottobre 2011, Thomas Schwinge ha scritto:
> > Just an oversight, or is there a reason to not changing
> > libnetfs/io-pathconf.c and term/users.c, too?
>
> term/users.c already does that, it seems.
Indeed. :-)
>
Pino Toscano, le Wed 19 Oct 2011 22:31:42 +0200, a écrit :
> term/users.c already does that, it seems.
> About libnetfs/io-pathconf.c, I don't have an NF setup, but I guess the
> attached patch should do it (testing welcome!).
Applied, thanks!
Samuel
Hi,
Alle mercoledì 19 ottobre 2011, Thomas Schwinge ha scritto:
> Just an oversight, or is there a reason to not changing
> libnetfs/io-pathconf.c and term/users.c, too?
term/users.c already does that, it seems.
About libnetfs/io-pathconf.c, I don't have an NF setup, but I guess the
attached pat
Hi!
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 00:09:32 +0200, Pino Toscano
wrote:
> currently, querying (f)pathconf() for _PC_PATH_MAX return -1 and sets
> errno = EINVAL. At least to my reading of pathconf() in POSIX, when a
> variable has no limit pathconf() for it should return -1 and not change
> errno. For ex
Pino Toscano, le Wed 19 Oct 2011 00:09:32 +0200, a écrit :
> At least to my reading of pathconf() in POSIX, when a variable has no
> limit pathconf() for it should return -1 and not change errno.
Agreed, applied, thanks!
Samuel
Hi,
currently, querying (f)pathconf() for _PC_PATH_MAX return -1 and sets
errno = EINVAL. At least to my reading of pathconf() in POSIX, when a
variable has no limit pathconf() for it should return -1 and not change
errno. For example:
$ getconf PATH_MAX .
getconf: pathconf: .: Invalid argu
