On 2 December 2011 03:35, Philip Guenther <guent...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 6:45 PM, Christiano F. Haesbaert > <haesba...@openbsd.org> wrote: >> Hi, I think we should warn() on any error, not just EPERM. >> This is more consistent with the rest of the code. >> >> ok ? > > I disagree with this. The existing message is much clearer to the > non-root mortal user that gets it and, IMO, it's clearer for the > message to be sent to stdout with the rest of the output from the > scan. > > As for errors other than EPERM, well, exactly what other errors *can* > that call return in ifconfig?
Now none since the initial block guarantees no ENETDOWN, but when we have another error in there, we'll have a silent error. > > What problem are you guys trying to solve? > Actually just code consistency. But I've wasted too much people's time with this already, it's bikeshed so don't bother.
