| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:00:06 -0400 From: Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu> To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de> Cc: sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, parisc-linux@...isc-linux.org Subject: Re: errno codes intertwined On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 06:24:48PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: ... > If a file does not have the requested attribute, the syscall will > produce ENODATA. On x86_64, that is mapped to the value 61. Back on the > sparc side, 61 is mapped to ECONNREFUSED, and that gives odd errors > when ls tries to query xattrs: I'd think that passing the raw error code is a bad idea, and that you probably want to have your own set of codes that you use in the trasport and map value to/from the host's errno values. > the values are exactly swapped (mips is another oddball not portrayed > here). Since these header files propagate into /usr/include, this > affects userspace programs too. Yep, and it kind of sucks. > So I'm just asking: can I rely on the same errno across Linuxes? I wouldn't - Linux on different different architectures seems to have different errno codes. > And should the errno values be fixed up? It would break userspace :-/ Josef 'Jeff' Sipek. -- *NOTE: This message is ROT-13 encrypted twice for extra protection* - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists