Hi Matthew and Joachim, Matthew Dempsky wrote on Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:34:50AM -0700:
> The issue here (if any) is that we over-specify the *successful* > return value as precisely 0, rather than generally non-negative. I like the general idea, so i'd suggest the following. Note that the exact wording has been chosen to be as close to the output of the .Rv macro as possible. In case we go into that direction, i suspect that some other manuals might contain similar overspecifications. Yours, Ingo Index: uname.3 =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/src/lib/libc/gen/uname.3,v retrieving revision 1.12 diff -u -r1.12 uname.3 --- uname.3 31 May 2007 19:19:29 -0000 1.12 +++ uname.3 18 Apr 2011 23:05:00 -0000 @@ -63,11 +63,14 @@ Machine hardware platform. .El .Sh RETURN VALUES -If +The .Fn uname -is successful, 0 is returned; otherwise, \-1 is returned and +function returns a non-negative value (on +.Ox , +always 0) if successful; otherwise the value -1 is returned +and the global variable .Va errno -is set appropriately. +is set to indicate the error. .Sh ERRORS The .Fn uname
