[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Proulx) writes: > But the hard link case is much more complicated than before. And > unfortunately does not cover the main case.
I'm afraid it's the best we can do for ENOENT without issuing more system calls. If link(a,b) fails with ENOENT, it could be a problem with either a or b. > Worried that list is still not all encompassing and not all of them > would be supported everywhere and that type of thing. Except for EDQUOT, all the error numbers were in Unix version 7 and have been required by POSIX for quite some time, so they should be quite safe. I will add this to system.h: #ifndef EDQUOT # define EDQUOT (-1) #endif to catch the oddball systems that lack disk-quota hooks. I understand your point about weird systems, but it's just a diagnostic that we're trying to improve the quality of, so there's no possible conformance issue here -- it's just a UI issue. So I'm still inclined to try to do a better job with the hard-link diagnostic, even if this sometimes means we might output a subset of the necessary info on weird systems that we don't know about right now. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
