Re: elm 2.5.3 and glibc 2.1.93

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 06:37:18PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>    Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 08:45:19 -0700
>    From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
> 
>    On Sat, Sep 23, 2000 at 03:19:33PM +0200, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>    > The Austin draft clearly states that (2.3 Error Numbers):
>    > 
>    >   The value of errno should only be examined when it is indicated to
>    >   be valid by a function's return value.
>    > 
>    > I assume that this is equivalent to what the current POSIX standard
>    > says.
>    > 
>    > Since fcntl is not an ISO C function, its current behaviour is
>    > perfectly fine, and elm isn't a POSIX conforming application and
>    > should be fixed.
>    > 

Please remember many ISO C functions in glibc may call fcntl (). What
do you want to do with them?


H.J.