From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LNtks-0007W3-8J for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:49:18 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LNtkr-0007Uy-FC for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:49:17 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57471 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LNtkr-0007Uj-5P for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:49:17 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f20.google.com ([209.85.221.20]:53906) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LNtkq-0005nw-QW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:49:16 -0500 Received: by qyk13 with SMTP id 13so2668095qyk.10 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:49:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4970D6A0.5090609@codemonkey.ws> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 12:49:04 -0600 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [6324] Return -errno on write failure (Gleb Natapov) References: <2431978291-BeMail@laptop> In-Reply-To: <2431978291-BeMail@laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org François Revol wrote: >> So BeOS is not ANSI C ! >> > > And so, well, what ? > It won't change any time soon. > Besides, there is no reason a language stantard should dictate such a > runtime thing... > And for what I've seen from it, it's not consistent with itself, saying > non-zero on a line, positive on the next one. > > Btw, was it available freely at the time ? I mean don't expect people > to comply with something you have to pay for. That's what you get. > (hint, POSIX drafts) > > It's not like any other OS I've seen doesn't violate some standard. > > Still, everything has been fine for a decade and suddenly people start > doing this kind of tricks out of the blue. It's not like considering > errno can be !=0 is orthogonal to the standard, so supporting BeOS > itself would't make the code itself violate ANSI C. > If a full set of patches was posted that to QEMU that made the latest SVN compile on BeOS with a free compiler, I would think we would evaluate them and determine how intrusive the changes were compared to the value of supporting BeOS and apply them if appropriate. Avoiding -errno, IMHO, is a fair trade off to support another platform even if there is a niche user base. That said, such patches have not been posted. I don't think it's wise to get into a habit of avoiding things because some random platform that QEMU doesn't support today doesn't support said feature. So I'm not inclined to change code that conforms to ANSI unless someone puts the work into supporting BeOS in mainline QEMU and that said work doesn't require very invasive changes. Regards, Anthony Liguori > François. > > >