Hello,
we have a bit of a mess concerning error definitions: POSIX 1003.1-200
defines the errors EOPNOTSUPP and ENOTSUP as follows:
[ENOTSUP] Not supported. The implementation does not support this
feature of the Realtime Option Group.
[EOPNOTSUPP] Operation not supported on socket. The type of socket
(address family or protocol) does not support the requested operation.
The standard further says the numbers assigned to ENOTSUP and EOPNOTSUPP shall
be unique.
Glibc seems to follow, but not quite:
[ENOTSUP] "Not supported". A function returns this error when
certain parameter values are valid, but the functionality they request
is not available. This can mean that the function does not implement
a particular command or option value or flag bit at all. For functions
that operate on some object given in a parameter, such as a file
descriptor or a port, it might instead mean that only that specific
object (file descriptor, port, etc.) is unable to support the other
parameters given; different file descriptors might support different
ranges of parameter values.
If the entire function is not available at all in the implementation,
it returns ENOSYS instead.
[EOPNOTSUPP] "Operation not supported". The operation you requested is
not supported. Some socket functions don't make sense for all types of
sockets, and others may not be implemented for all communications
protocols. In the GNU system, this error can happen for many calls when
the object does not support the particular operation; it is a generic
indication that the server knows nothing to do for that call.
In Glibc's sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/bits/errno.h it says:
/* Linux has no ENOTSUP error code. */
# define ENOTSUP EOPNOTSUPP
In the kernel we define EOPNOTSUPP (architecture specific) and
ENOTSUPP (in include/linux/errno.h). ENOTSUPP doesn't exist inside POSIX.
Is ENOTSUPP supposed to be the same as ENOTSUP? Some applications are
already checking for ENOTSUP; if they are compiled against Glibs they
currently will really check against EOPNOTSUPP. Renaming or aliasig
ENOTSUPP to ENOTSUP will cause trouble, but aliasing ENOTSUP to
EOPNOTSUPP leads to a conflict with POSIX.
What shall be done?
Regards,
Andreas.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Andreas Gruenbacher SuSE Linux AG
mailto:agruen@suse.de Deutschherrnstr. 15-19
http://www.suse.de/ D-90429 Nuernberg, Germany
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 07 2002 - 22:00:16 EST