>[ some experimenting later ... ] What it appears to be doing is filling >the buffer to the specified length and then returning -1 anyway. Given >your argument that there is no reason for it to fail, I suppose the >quickest hack is to assume that -1 means the same as "buffer filled".
Be careful, my point wasn't that it wasn't supposed to fail, my point was that returning -1 means "error". I don't see how we can portably assume -1 means "buffer filled". I think I'm with Paul Vixie on this one; it's not unreasonable in this day and age to require a POSIX C library. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
