linux-kernel - Re: execve() returns ENOENT when ld-linux.so isn't found

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <r2rb2cc26e41003311236mb281e842pbdaf6e7632e288a8@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:36:45 +0200
From:	Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@...il.com>
To:	Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>,
	Luca Barbieri <luca.barbieri@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: execve() returns ENOENT when ld-linux.so isn't found

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Andreas Schwab <schwab@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> Olaf van der Spek <olafvdspek@...il.com> writes:
>
>> File not found is a very common error message with a pretty will
>> understood meaning.
>
> And perfectly applicable here (as you write yourself in the subject).

No, it's not. It does not apply to the argument of the function called.

>> Overloading another error code would avoid this confusion, especially
>> since it's far less used.
>
> Changing a well understood error number into a totally misleading one
> only increases confusion.

Why is it totally misleading? The proposed new one is actually very close.

Olaf
--
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/