Re: [PATCH RFC] make error codes a formal part of the ABI

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@eu.citrix.com>]

On Tue, 2015-01-13 at 16:57 +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Ian Campbell writes ("Re: [PATCH RFC] make error codes a formal part of the ABI"):
> > On Tue, 2015-01-13 at 16:21 +0000, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > There's on small block commented with TBD left in the public header.
> > > This is the main reason for the submission being RFC. While we don't
> > > currently use these error codes, I'm not sure if we should leave all
> > > or some of them out for the time being.
> > 
> > I say lets omit any we don't use for now.
> 
> Is it possible that anyone is using the existing header file where
> these values were defined ?

It's not installed or in the regular header paths, so it seems unlikely,
or at least they would have had to jump through some hoops and no doubt
have a big comment about their fragile hack...

>   If so their code might say
>   case ELOOP:
> which would not compile when they switched to the new header.
> 
> I don't know whether this is likely, or a problem.
> 
> Ian.