From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9UX-0001Vo-91 for mharc-grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:09 -0500 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9UV-0001Vj-Qo for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:07 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9UV-0001VU-E8 for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:07 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9UV-0001VR-8x for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:07 -0500 Received: from ns39764.ovh.net ([91.121.25.85] helo=nexedi.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JI9UU-0003k2-VU for grub-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:20:07 -0500 Received: from [10.8.0.46] (unknown [10.8.0.46]) by nexedi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C36A3EB23 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:26:15 +0100 (CET) From: "Yoshinori K. Okuji" Organization: enbug.org To: The development of GRUB 2 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:19:55 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.4 References: <94a0ccbc0801231500g752f72acodc37c733726d8919@mail.gmail.com> <4798D42E.7030506@nic.fi> <1201199662.19286.4.camel@dv> In-Reply-To: <1201199662.19286.4.camel@dv> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801242219.55828.okuji@enbug.org> X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Subject: Re: /kern/file.c BUG X-BeenThere: grub-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: The development of GRUB 2 List-Id: The development of GRUB 2 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:20:08 -0000 On Thursday 24 January 2008 19:34, Pavel Roskin wrote: > On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 20:08 +0200, Vesa J=E4=E4skel=E4inen wrote: > > Previous behavior was working correctly. You have to handle > > errorcodes > > at some point and that means when error is handled it is zeroed (or > > GRUB_ERR_NONE). So code is in callee where that loop was. > > I suggest that we never set grub_errno to 0 (except the initialization). > That would match the standard errno behavior: > > http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/errno.html Marco is right. As you pointed out, our error handling is different from er= rno=20 on Unix, but this is intentional, because I stole the model from GRUB Legac= y=20 and Parted. Okuji